- Email: [email protected]
Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
C H A P T E R
44
Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis Eric W. Sanderson*, David Mallon**, Thomas McCarthy†, Peter Zahler*, Kim Fisher* *WCS Asia Program, Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, NY, USA **Division of Biology and Conservation Ecology, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK † Snow Leopard Program, Panthera, New York, NY, USA
INTRODUCTION The idea of a strategy derives from the ancient Greek concept of “strategia,” or the art of the troop leader; that is, strategies are matter of command and generalship (Thesarus Linguae Graecae, 2011). Generals concern themselves with high-level decision making to obtain a specified objective, especially under conditions of uncertainty and limited resources where not every option can be pursued simultaneously. In military terms, strategy is distinguished from tactics, which are the subset of skills required to meet the objective, such as logistics or intelligence. The term first came into use in the Eastern
Snow Leopards http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802213-9.00044-4
Roman Empire around the sixth century and was only translated into the Western vernacular in the nineteenth century. Similar ideas have been articulated by great leaders in other parts of the world as well. In more recent times, the idea of strategy has left a purely military realm and entered politics, business, sports, and even conservation. A good strategy includes articulating a vision, setting one or more time-bound goals, determining actions to achieve that goal, and mobilizing resources to execute those actions (c.f. Groves et al., 2003). The strategy therefore describes how the ends are achieved by the means, and enables leaders to deploy resources wisely and effectively
543
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
544
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
while coordinating among partners. Sun Tzu, the famous Chinese strategist, wrote in the Art of War (2007) that unity, not size, is a source of strength. Mintzberg et al. (2002) defined strategy as “a pattern in a stream of decisions” not simply planning, while Mckeown (2012) argues that “strategy is about shaping the future,” achieving “desirable ends with available means.” Conservation of biological diversity is a desirable end, but it is sadly limited in its available means, especially given the rather ambitious goal of preserving the diversity of life on Earth for future generations (Wilson, 2003). Because conservation leaders in governments and other institutions constantly face decisions in a climate of uncertainty and limited resources, strategy is critical to the practice of conservation. Strategic planning often occurs as a mechanism for building consensus, enthusiasm, and support for conservation of a species (Sanderson et al., 2002). In the past, strategic planning efforts have led to renewed investments for tigers (ExxonMobil, 2000) and jaguars (Society for Conservation Biology, 2002). Most species are not so lucky. The vast majority of species lack explicit strategies for their conservation (Species Conservation Planning Task Force, 2008). As a result, conservation goals for most of biodiversity lack specificity beyond the implicit goal suggested by the IUCN Red List categories; that is, for taxa to be listed as “Species of Least Concern” and not something else (IUCN SSC, 2000). Least Concern species are not endangered, threatened, or vulnerable because they do not face a high risk of extinction in the wild. Avoiding imminent extinction does not seem to be a high bar for conservation (c.f. Westwood et al., 2014; Neel et al., 2012; Sanderson, 2006), but the finality of species extinction has successfully mobilized policy tools such as the US Endangered Species Act and the IUCN Red Listing process and continues to be an ideological mainstay of conservation (Neel et al., 2012; Ladle and Jepson, 2008). Snow leopards are
currently listed as endangered under the IUCN Red List process (Jackson et al., 2008), though one might question this listing, given that the species remains widely distributed in multiple populations (see Chapter 3). Although most conservationists would agree that avoiding species extinction is an immediate goal, it should not be the end goal for conservation (Sanderson, 2006). Redford et al. (2011), for example, suggest a more affirmative definition for successful species conservation. They write that any species that is successfully conserved will have the following characteristics: (i) be selfsustaining demographically and ecologically, (ii) be genetically robust, (iii) have healthy populations, (iv) have representative populations distributed across the historical range in ecologically representative settings, (v) have replicate populations within each ecological setting, and (vi) be resilient (i.e., able to continue to express key demographic, genetic, behavior, and ecological attributes even when disturbed by climate change or other factors) across the range. Snow leopards (Panthera uncia) are a species where considerable effort has been expended on strategic thinking by governments, conservation organizations, academic institutions, and development agencies, and where many of the components of the Redford et al. (2011) definition of successful conservation might be usefully applied. Just since 2000, four global strategies have been developed for the species: the Snow Leopard Survival Strategy (McCarthy and Chapron, 2003); the Snow Leopard Range-wide Assessment and Conservation Planning meeting in Beijing, China, in 2008 (Williams, 2008: McCarthy et al., 2009; see Chapter 3); the Global Snow Leopard and Ecosystem Protection Program (Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, 2013; see Chapter 45); and the Snow Leopard Survival Strategy, Revised Version 2014.1 (Snow Leopard Network, 2014). Hereafter these will be referred to as SLSS 2003, the SLRAC 2008, GSLEP 2013, and SLSS 2014, respectively. Many of these strategies pick up elements of the Redford et al. (2011)
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
Snow leopard strategies
prescription for successful conservation, while the exact elements and their construction into strategic formulations shows how snow leopard conservationists have evolved their strategic thinking over the past two decades. This chapter identifies areas of convergence and highlights points of divergence among these strategies by considering their goal/vision statements, especially those that address the “why,” “where,” and “how” of snow leopard conservation. “Why” refers to why people should invest effort in conserving the species; answers to “why snow leopard conservation” thus express the values the snow leopard strategists hold for snow leopards. Convergence of values among governments, scientists, conservationists, and communities suggests a basis for cooperation. “Where” refers to geographic representations of snow leopard range and conservation sites in the four conservation strategies. Understanding the distribution of snow leopard across an immense range (>3,000,000 km2), and showing how that range intersects with nation states and ecological settings, suggests where conservation efforts should be optimally distributed from a strategic perspective. “How” refers to the conservation activities necessary to fulfill the vision of conservation of the species. If why and where are strategic elements, then how brings in the logistics, including the kinds of expertise necessary for conservation of this species. More importantly, bringing the why, where, and how of snow leopard conservation together suggests an emerging strategic synthesis for snow leopard conservation against which future progress can be measured.
SNOW LEOPARD STRATEGIES Snow Leopard Survival Strategy (SLSS 2003) In 2002, approximately 58 snow leopard specialists, including researchers, advocates, and conservationists from range states and elsewhere
545
met in Seattle, USA, for the Snow Leopard Survival Summit. In a foreword to the first SLSS, Urs and Christine Breitenmoser wrote “that across mountain ridges and deserts, national borders and cultural barriers – the common values for which we fight, far outweigh the few differences that separate us.” What those values were was not clearly expressed, but the Executive Summary emphasizes that the SLSS is necessary to “save the endangered snow leopard” and the title of the volume (a “survival strategy”) suggests the main driver was avoiding extinction. This focus made sense at the time, because the snow leopard was listed as endangered again in 2002, just as it had been in 1986, 1988, 1990, 1994, and 1996 (Baillie and Groombridge, 1996; Groombridge, 1994; IUCN, 1990; IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1988; IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1986). As of July 2015, the snow leopard was still considered endangered. The latest assessment by Jackson et al. (2008) listed the species as endangered because the species was “suspected to have declined by 20% over the past two generations (16 years) due to habitat and prey base loss, and poaching and persecution,” and the global snow leopard effective population size was suspected to be fewer than 2500 individuals (Jackson et al., 2008). Given the IUCN status of the species, the SLSS 2003 set out the following tactical objectives (note, in this chapter, we distinguish between goals, which refer to the desired state of the species at some point in time, and objectives, which are activities to help achieve a desired state, which is somewhat different terminology that used by the SLSS 2003; for further discussion of the confusing terminology of conservation planning, see Sanderson, 2006, or Groves et al., 2003): • Assess and prioritize threats to snow leopards on a geographic basis. • Define and prioritize appropriate conservation, education, and policy measures appropriate to alleviate threats.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
546
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
FIGURE 44.1 Ecological settings defined for potential snow leopard range in 2008 at the Snow Leopard Range-wide Assessment and Conservation Planning (Williams 2008). Ecological settings are portions of the range where snow leopards have a distinct relationship to the prey and ecosystems where they live. Potential range is defined in Chapter 3.
• Prioritize subjects for snow leopard research and identify viable and preferred research methods. • Build a network of concerned scientists and conservationists to facilitate open dialogue and cross-border cooperation. • Gain consensus on a fundamental Snow Leopard Survival Strategy document that will be made available to the range states in conservation planning at national and local levels. The SLSS document itself satisfied the first three and the fifth objectives upon publication.
And the process of writing the SLSS 2003 was vital to creation of the Snow Leopard Network, which remains an active organization, satisfying the fourth objective (see Chapter 43). On its own terms, the SLSS 2003 was an immediate success. Geographically, the SLSS 2003 divided and assessed snow leopard range by political units (i.e., range states, or the countries where snow leopards have been reported). Status assessments were provided for 12 range states and one possible (Myanmar) (Fig. 44.1), and the legal status was reported for those 12 states. Threats and research needs were evaluated in four snow
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
Snow leopard strategies
leopard regions, which were agglomerations of nation states or parts of nation states. The SLSS 2003 thus set the precedent for thinking about snow leopard populations in biogeographic groupings that crossed international boundaries. These regions included the Himalaya (abbreviated HIMLY), including the Tibetan Plateau and other parts of southern China, India, Nepal, and Bhutan; the Karakorum and Hindu Kush Range (KK/HK), including Afghanistan, Pakistan, and southwest China; the Commonwealth of Independent States and western China (CISWC), including Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, and Xinjiang Province in China; and the northern snow leopard range (NRANG), which included China’s Altai and Tien Shan Mountains, Mongolia, and Russia. SLSS 2003 included a short section on “potential actions to address threats” that followed an extensive analysis of the threats to snow leopard conservation. The potential actions considered were grazing management, income generation (for people living near snow leopards), cottage industries, an ungulate trophy hunting program (recognizing the competition between human hunters and snow leopards for the same prey), reducing poaching and trade in snow leopard parts, reducing livestock depredation by snow leopards, animal husbandry (for livestock), and conservation education and awareness. Each action type was addressed at the policy and local community level. The remainder of the strategy was given to identification of research and information needs and a short section range state action planning.
Snow Leopard Survival Strategy, Revised Version 2014.1 (SLSS 2014) The Snow Leopard Network, which formed after the first SLSS meeting, published an updated SLSS in 2014. Interestingly, in the update the values for snow leopards were recast in a more positive light and to give a wider perspective, in keeping with the GSLEP 2013 (Global Snow Leopard and
547
Ecosystem Protection Program; see following), which was being developed concurrently. Endangerment is not mentioned; rather SLSS 2014 emphasizes the iconic nature of the cat and its ecological dependency on prey species and healthy rangelands. The passage is worth quoting in full: The iconic snow leopard is the least known of the “big cats” due to its elusive nature, secretive habits and the remote and challenging terrain it inhabits. As an apex predator, its survival depends on healthy populations of mountain ungulates, the major prey; these in turn depend on the availability of goodquality rangeland minimally degraded by concurrent use from livestock and humans. The snow leopard has a large home range size, so viable populations can be secured only across large landscapes. The snow leopard therefore represents the ideal flagship and umbrella species for the mountain ecosystems of Asia. Snow leopards share their range with pastoral communities who also require healthy rangelands to sustain their livestock and livelihoods. Moreover, these high altitude mountains and plateaus provide invaluable ecosystem services through carbon storage in peat lands and grasslands, and serve as Asia’s ‘water towers’, providing fresh water for hundreds of millions of people living downstream in Central, East and South Asia.
From this basis, SLSS 2014 reiterated the first three action-oriented goals of SLSS 2003 for the 2014 revision. No meeting was held because the process was conducted in parallel with the GSLEP 2013 strategy, which included a large international meeting in October 2013 of many of the same people and institutions. The revised SLSS provided updated status assessments for 12 countries and mentioned Myanmar as a possible, but unlikely, range state. Threats and research needs were addressed as a series of chapters on a range-wide scale, though some chapters and the three appendices included data by nation and subnation (e.g., regions within China), including a valuable list of camera trapping studies and a list of protected areas where snow leopards are known to occur. In general the approach to snow leopard geography emphasized political boundaries based on range states.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
548
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
SLSS 2014, like its predecessor, included a review of threats to the species, along with a revised set of action items for each threat. Chapters were dedicated to explaining and suggesting action-oriented responses to livestock competition, illegal trade, climate change, and large-scale infrastructure development, including mining, electrical power infrastructure, and linear barriers (e.g., railroads, highways, fences). A separate chapter titled “Conservation Actions” focused on community-based conservation efforts to help local people see the presence of wild snow leopards as beneficial or at least neutral. These include handicrafts, savings and credit programs, corral improvements, livestock insurance, veterinary assistance, ecotourism, and education and awareness-raising.
Snow Leopard Range-wide Assessment and Conservation Planning (2008) In 2008, a similar but not identical group of researchers, conservationists, and government officials met in Beijing, China, at a meeting organized by Panthera, the Snow Leopard Network, Snow Leopard Trust (SLT), and the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) (Williams, 2008; McCarthy et al., 2009; see Chapter 3). The purpose of this meeting was to develop a rangewide assessment and conservation vision for the snow leopard, using procedures described by the SSC (2008) and in related planning efforts for large wild felids, including jaguars (Sanderson et al., 2002), lions (IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group, 2006), cheetahs (Durant, 2007), and tigers (Sanderson et al., 2006; Dinerstein et al., 2007). Working together, this group prepared a conservation vision statement for the snow leopard, explicitly linked back to datasets developed through the range-wide assessment: A world where snow leopards and their wild prey thrive in healthy mountain ecosystems across all major ecological settings of their entire range, and where snow leopards are revered as unique ecological, economic, aesthetic and spiritual assets.
A vision like this one represents an aspirational state, which may never be realized, but whose expressed values guide conservation efforts. In this vision statement, snow leopards, their wild (as opposed to domesticated) prey, and healthy mountain ecosystems are considered a joint unit for conservation. Multiple instances of this unit are valued across different “ecological settings” that collectively encompass the entire range. In other words, one example population, or even several in the same ecological circumstances, would not satisfy the vision statement. Rather, variable combinations of snow leopards, prey, and “healthy mountain ecosystems” are desired. At the Beijing meeting, these were described as regions where snow leopards display ecological characteristics or interactions not found in other parts of the range. These could include different habitat usage patterns, different prey base, different home ranges or dispersal patterns, or different behavioral repertoires. To bring even greater clarity, the vision statement was directly linked to a map that described seven ecological settings that collectively span the potential range of the species. The experts assembled at that meeting created consensus maps displaying snow leopard conservation units (SLCUs), ecological settings, and the potential range of the species (Fig. 44.2) (see Chapter 3). The ecological values of snow leopards were explicitly coupled with other kinds of values, including both material (ecological and economic) and nonmaterial (aesthetic and spiritual) benefits to people. The language is unusual, coupling a spiritual concept, “reverence,” with an economic one, “assets.” After consideration of a conservation vision for the species, the research community was joined by representatives from most of the range states to develop country-specific action plans. Those action plans highlighted a wide variety of conservation actions for snow leopards as indicated in Table 44.3.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
Snow leopard strategies
549
FIGURE 44.2 Snow leopard range states. Range states are countries that overlap the potential distribution of snow leopards as shown in Figure 44.1.
Global Snow Leopard and Ecosystem Protection Program (GSLEP) (2013) In October 2013, representatives of 12 range state nations and a variety of snow leopard conservation and ecosystem protection partner organizations (similar but not identical to the groups that produced the SLSS 2003 and the SLRAC 2008) met in Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic, to launch a new international effort to save the snow leopard and conserve high-mountain ecosystems (see Chapter 45). This process was aimed at creating a policy framework for snow leopard conservation among range state
governments. To that end, an important output of the meeting was the jointly agreed Bishkek Declaration on the Conservation of Snow Leopards, which acknowledged that snow leopards were: “. . . an irreplaceable symbol of our nation’s natural and cultural heritage and an indicator of the health and sustainability of mountain ecosystems” and recognized that mountain ecosystems inhabited by snow leopards provide “essential ecosystem services, including storing and releasing water . . ., sustaining pastoral and agricultural livelihoods … ; and offering inspiration, recreation, and economic opportunities.”
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
550
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
Thus the Bishkek Declaration creates a symbolic relationship between the conservation of snow leopards and the ecosystem services provided by snow leopard habitat. The Bishkek Declaration was published with an extensive report describing the new program. The first chapter expresses the same idea as the SLRAC 2008 that snow leopards, their wild prey, and their ecosystems form a joint unit for conservation. It goes on to elaborate on the various ecosystem services provided to people in Central and South Asia by this unit, including cultural services, water services, biodiversity, medicine, agro-pastoralism, carbon sequestration and storage, and recreation and economic opportunities. The report argues that “many of the threats to snow leopards and to their prey and ecosystems have the potential to degrade the provisioning of these ecosystem services.” To address where to conserve snow leopards, the GSLEP described an explicit goal called “20 by 2020,” which states:
enabling activities for snow leopard conservation, namely:
The goal of GSLEP is for the 12 range countries, with support from interested organizations, to work together to identify and secure 20 snow leopard landscapes across the big cat’s range by 2020.
WHY CONSERVE SNOW LEOPARDS?
Secure snow leopard landscapes are defined as those that (i) contain at least 100 breeding age snow leopards conserved with the involvement of local communities, (ii) support adequate and secure prey populations, and (iii) have functional connectivity to other snow leopard landscapes, some of which cross international boundaries (Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, 2013). A proposed set of 23 landscapes were described on a map that collectively ensure that the 12 nations that have supported the Bishkek Declaration each have at least one area important for snow leopards. Conservation of these areas is described under the slogan: “Secure 20 by 2020.” Actually securing snow leopard landscapes of course requires actions on the ground. The Bishkek Declaration recognized this by describing a set of five direct impact activities and three
1. Engaging local communities in conservation, including promoting sustainable livelihoods, and addressing human-wildlife conflict 2. Managing habitat and prey based upon monitoring and evaluation of populations and range areas 3. Combatting poaching and illegal trade 4. Transboundary management and enforcement 5. Engaging industry 6. Building capacity and enhancing conservation policies and institutions 7. Research and monitoring 8. Building awareness These eight activities were further elaborated in the GSLEP 2013 as a set of “good practices for snow leopard, prey, and habitat conservation” and a further set of activity “portfolios.”
The four strategies describe a set of broadly shared values for snow leopards, which have evolved over the first decade and a half of the twenty-first century (Table 44.1). In the SLSS 2003, the values of snow leopard conservation were largely implicit. A group of people who already shared in an interest in conservation and feared for the future of the species gathered together to make a strategy for conservation. Their efforts were largely tactically focused: What does the conservation community know about snow leopards? What are the most important threats and places? How do we cooperate better to save the species? Values and geographies were not expressed explicitly. It is not surprising therefore that the SLRAC 2008 planning meeting attempted to fill gaps in the earlier work by making an explicit value statement through a vision statement, and a more exact description of the geography
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
551
Where to conserve snow leopards?
TABLE 44.1 Comparison of Values for Snow Leopards in Four Twenty-First-Century Conservation Strategies Conservation value
SLSS 2003
SLRAC 2008
GSLEP 2013
SLSS 2014
Avoid extinction; existence value
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
Ecological functionality of species
X
Ecosystem services of habitat
[X]
X
X
Cultural significance
X
X
X
Representation on an ecological basis
X X
X
Representation on a national basis
[X]
[X]
[X], Implicit values in the strategies, as interpreted by the authors; X, Explicit values stated in the strategies.
through a well-established and globally recognized range-wide assessment process (e.g., Sanderson et al., 2002). This process carried with it an emphasis on ecological, as opposed to political, geography. This idea can trace its origins back to work on tigers in the 1990s (e.g., Dinerstein et al., 1997), which was replicated and refined through work on other large cats (e.g., jaguars – Sanderson et al., 2002; lions – Nowell and Bauer, 2006). The Beijing vision statement asserts the importance of the shared conservation units comprised of snow leopards and their prey and the mountain ecosystems where they live. Multiple instances of these units are desired for conservation across the range, an idea later expressed more generally for all species by Redford et al. (2011). The GSLEP 2013 and SLSS 2014 further build and expand on the idea of a conservation unit by placing snow leopard conservation in the context of ecosystem services. The “reverence” for snow leopards as “assets” in the SLRAC 2008 vision has been complemented by a carefully articulated argument for ecosystem services delivered both to people who share snow leopard range and the millions that benefit from mountain “water towers” downstream. Nearly one-third of the world’s current human population draws power, irrigation, industrial waters, and fishery benefits from snow leopard habitat (GSLEP, 2013). SLSS 2014 represents the leading expression of this concept to date by chaining the ideas
together logically. The snow leopard as a predator depends on wild prey (largely grazing and browsing ungulates), which in turn depend on functioning mountain ecosystems. Functioning mountain ecosystems also provide carbon storage, water, and agro-pastoral opportunities for local, often impoverished, communities. It is clear from this logic, as elaborated in the four strategies and other chapters of this book, that snow leopards are dependent on functioning mountain ecosystems in Asia. It is perhaps less clear that the ecosystems are dependent on snow leopards as such (see relevant discussion in Ray et al., 2005). No one claims that snow leopards directly provide water or sequester much carbon. What depends on snow leopards in particular are the cultural values of the species, whether we describe these as “cultural services” or “revered assets” or “existence values.” Snow leopards are beautiful, valuable, and iconic in their own right, and they are also symbolic of the beautiful, valuable, iconic ecosystems where they live.
WHERE TO CONSERVE SNOW LEOPARDS? The strategies express two different ways of framing the geography of species conservation: conservation by nation state or conservation by ecological setting (Table 44.2). Three of the four strategies considered here adopt contemporary
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
552
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
TABLE 44.2 Geographic Treatment of Snow Leopard Range in Four Twenty-First-Century Conservation Strategies Geographic description
SLSS 2003
SLRAC 2008
GSLEP 2013
SLSS 2014
By nation states
13*
11**
12***
13
By ecological region or setting
4 regions
9 ecological settings
None
None
Number of units, areas or landscapes
None
69 snow leopard conservation units
20 snow leopard landscapes
186 protected areas
3,024,728
3,256,840
Not given
1,200,000–3,000,000+
1,846,000
1,230,881****
1,766,000
Various
Extent of potential range (km2) 2
Extent of occupied habitat (km )
* Afghanistan, Bhutan, China, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Myanmar, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. ** Kazakhstan and Myanmar were not represented. *** Myanmar was not represented. **** Definitive plus probable range (see Chapter 3).
political geography as the frame for conserving a species that evolved over 2 million years (see Chapter 1). A political perspective dominates because human decision making about conservation is in fact political and state specific; no country has no formal influence on what happens beyond its boundaries except through international agreements between sovereign states (such as the Bishkek Declaration). Political cooperation is necessary because snow leopards often inhabit transboundary mountains, where high ridges demarcate polities as well as watersheds. Moreover cooperation is necessary, across nations and across sectors, also because the limited resources for snow leopard conservation and the immensity of the task require pooling resources together. The main difficulty with politically defined goals for conservation is that they may be hindered by other aspects of the political process that have nothing to do with conservation (Leader-Williams et al., 2010; Czech et al., 1998). Other political priorities may and do intervene, leading to science being sidelined or ignored, and/or limiting participation. The GSLEP 2013 landscapes, for example, identify only a few marginal areas in China, despite the fact that science clearly indicates that broad swaths of China are important snow leopard habitat. The opposite can also occur. No one knows the scientific status of the small corner of potential range
in Myanmar where the species might occur, so that country did not participate in the GSLEP process. An ecological lens on snow leopard geography is complementary to a politically oriented system of conservation priorities and less subject to political factors that have nothing to do with conservation. Ecological conservation focuses on what makes a particular conservation unit (e.g., snow leopards, prey, ecosystem characteristics) distinctive in terms consistent with long-term co-evolution of the species and other aspects of the ecosystem (Dinerstein et al., 1997; Sanderson et al., 2002). Distinctiveness can be defined in terms of predator-prey relations, habitat use, behavioral differences, or for ecosystems, differences in provisioned ecosystem services (c.f. Hidasi-Neto et al., 2015). Once one has the concept of ecological distinctiveness within a species, and mechanisms to define it, then one can also express goals for conservation in terms of the ecology of the species. These logical interconnections are all deeply satisfying to scientifically minded conservationists. For example, in the SLRAC 2008, that expression is a vision to conserve areas important for snow leopards within the seven major ecological settings defined across the entire potential range of the species. The implicit rationale is that conservation of these areas will conserve snow leopards, evolutionary potential, ecological functionality, and
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
Where to conserve snow leopards?
553
FIGURE 44.3 Geographic overlap between the “20 by 2020 snow leopard landscapes” defined GSLEP 2013 (Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, 2013) and the snow leopard conservation units defined by SLRAC 2008 (Williams, 2008). A snow leopard conservation unit was defined as a Type I if it contains a population of resident snow leopards large enough to be potentially self-sustaining over the next 100 years (note this implies a stable prey base by definition); Type II if it contains fewer snow leopards than Type I (i.e., not self-sustaining for 100 years), but with adequate habitat such that snow leopard numbers could increase if threats were alleviated; or Type III, if snow leopards are definitely extant in the area, but have inadequate habitat or wild prey, or the population is too small or too threatened to be considered viable over the long-term without large investments to reduce threats in the short term (see Chapter 3).
provide the widest possible diversity of ecosystem services. The disadvantage of the ecological approach to conservation is that no one person or organization has responsibility for snow leopards in, for example, the Himalayas. Cooperation is required. The best of all possible worlds is to find overlap between ecological and political conservation priorities. Comparison of the snow leopard
conservation units produced in Beijing and the snow leopard landscapes produced in Bishkek shows that there is substantial overlap, especially through the mountain ranges that ring the range (Fig. 44.3). There are many more SLRAC snow leopard conservation units (69) than the GSLEP’s 23 “20 by 2020 landscapes,” but the landscapes make up for that by crossing or encompassing multiple conservation units. The only area where there is not
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
554
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
substantive agreement is in China, where the GSLEP process analysis shows only three landscape, while the conservation units from the SLRAC 2008 are numerous, varied, and in the case of the Tibetan Plateau, geographically enormous.
HOW TO CONSERVE SNOW LEOPARDS? There is no one way to conserve snow leopards; there are lots of ways. One might expect a diversity of conservation approaches given the vast geography of the species, encompassing not only many different ecologically distinct mountain ranges, but also many different countries and cultures. The art of the conservation strategist is picking the right approach in the right place and the right time (often in an environment of constrained resources). Fortunately, a wide range of different activities have been suggested to conserve snow leopards – a virtual panoply of twenty-first-century conservation strategies – and many of them have been tried in different places, at different times, and by different organizations. Table 44.3 combines the suggested conservation activities from these four strategies into a coherent framework. Only three approaches to snow leopard conservation are shared across all four strategies: local community involvement, capacity building for snow leopard conservation, and improved implementation of treaty obligations (e.g., CITES, CMS) on behalf of signatory snow leopard range states. Fourteen other approaches are endorsed by three of the strategies. Detailing these shared approaches is beyond the scope of this chapter, but they are discussed in other chapters of this book (e.g., Chapters 13, 14, and 16).
A STRATEGIC SYNTHESIS Given the evolving expressions of values for snow leopard conservation and the significant overlap in conservation geography among the
four strategies, the snow leopard conservation community is well placed for a strategic synthesis. Table 44.1 shows how the values for snow leopard conservation have evolved over time, to the current emphasis on the cultural values of snow leopards and the ecosystem services of the mountain ecosystems they represent. Table 44.2 indicates the many opportunities for snow leopard conservation, which can be framed in overlapping political and ecological geographies. Table 44.3 suggests agreement on a small number of approaches to range-wide conservation (community engagement, capacity building, international agreements), and many other approaches that are recommended across multiple strategies. On the basis of these similarities, we believe that the snow leopard conservation community is poised for a global strategic synthesis. We suggest the following vision statement, which draws from the four strategies and represents a shared aspirational state of the species in the future: A world where snow leopards and their wild prey thrive in healthy mountain ecosystems across the full extent of snow leopard’s potential range and where those interconnected ecosystems provide ecological, economic, aesthetic and cultural benefits to people in the mountains and downstream watersheds.
As a goal, the show leopard conservationists and range states should commit to: By 2025, to have successfully conserved snow leopard populations with their wild prey in nationally and ecologically representative, healthy mountain landscapes that ensure range-wide connectivity and that provide abundant ecosystem services to local and downstream populations.
Expressing the goal in the context of the four strategies enables conservation “generals” working in governments, conservation organizations, and civil society to divide and conquer the conservation problem. Terms are now well defined. Everyone agrees that there should be
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
555
A strategic synthesis
TABLE 44.3 Comparison of Suggested Actions for Snow Leopard Conservation in Four Twenty-First-Century Conservation Strategies Actions to conserve snow leopards
SLSS 2003
SLRAC 2008
GSLEP 2013
SLSS 2014
X
X
X
X
X
X
Engaging local communities in conservation Use participatory approach, integrate community needs into snow leopard conservation Employ community-based conflict mitigation/resolution Improve livestock husbandry, including monitoring of depredation events
X
Livestock insurance/compensation and vaccination programs linked to snow leopard conservation
X
X X
X
Support construction of predator proof corrals
X
X
X
Encourage alternative livelihoods for local communities other than livestock grazing, including savings and credit programs and ecotourism
X
X
X
Work on climate change adaptation strategies with communities
X
Managing habitat and prey based on scientific monitoring Establish long-term monitoring of snow leopard, prey, and habitat
X
X
Create/enhance/expand protected area networks
X
X
Create management and monitoring plans for existing protected areas Support sustainable pasture and grazing management
X X
Support restoration in degraded landscapes to attain snow leopard conservation Manage ungulate trophy hunting programs in a sustainable way compatible with snow leopard needs
X X
X
Also see section: Build capacity and enhance conservation policies and institutions.
X
X
X
X
X
Combatting poaching and illegal trade Improve/enforce laws on conservation, hunting/poaching, trade
X
Education and outreach to relevant communities (e.g., development agencies, military, tourists) Regularly monitor markets for illegal snow leopard and prey parts
X X
X
Also see section: Engaging local communities activities.
X
X
X
Also see section: Transboundary management and enforcement.
X
X
X
X
X
X
Also see section: Build capacity and enhance conservation policies and institutions.
X
(Continued)
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
556
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
TABLE 44.3 Comparison of Suggested Actions for Snow Leopard Conservation in Four Twenty-First-Century Conservation Strategies (cont.) Actions to conserve snow leopards
SLSS 2003
SLRAC 2008
GSLEP 2013
Initiate/enhance transboundary cooperation, including bilateral and multilateral agreements
X
X
Foster a landscape level approach to conservation, including no net-loss policies for biodiversity
X
X
SLSS 2014
Transboundary management and enforcement
Capacity building for border and customs officials
X
Establish transboundary protected areas
X
X
Engaging industry in snow leopard conservation Use snow leopards as indicator species of impacts of development
X
Invite industrial officials to relevant snow leopard conservation events
X
Consult with development-oriented ministries regarding snow leopard conservation priority areas, including through the Environmental and Social Assessment process
X
X
X
X
X
X
Build capacity and enhance conservation policies and institutions Improve treaty (e.g., CITES, CMS) implementation
X
Improve and strengthen national laws regarding snow leopard conservation
X
Build national capacity for research, monitoring and enforcement, including workshops and seminars
X
X
X
X
Develop/implement National Snow Leopard Action Plan
X
X
Establish rescue centers for rehabilitation of orphan cubs, injured adults
X
Also see section: Build awareness of snow leopards and snow leopard conservation efforts.
X
Research and monitoring Assess status of snow leopards, prey, and habitat relative to conservation goals
X
Assess impact of climate change on snow leopards, prey, and habitat
X
X
X
X
X
Build awareness of snow leopards and snow leopard conservation efforts Establish awareness campaigns to facilitate snow leopard conservation at all levels
X
Provide educational materials to schools about snow leopard conservation
X
X
Also see section: Engage local communities activities.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
X X
X
REFERENCES
enough snow leopards to ensure long-term population viability of at least representative populations on a national and ecological basis and across the entire range (see Chapter 3). Moreover, successfully conserved snow leopard prey populations should be abundant enough so that snow leopards do not depend on domesticated animals, but can maintain themselves on wild prey alone (see Chapter 4). Successful conservation includes enforced legal protections that prohibit snow leopard hunting and trade (see Chapter 18), and manage harvest of prey species sustainably (see Chapter 16). Successfully conserved healthy mountain landscapes provide ecosystem services such as water provision, carbon sequestration, agro-pastoral opportunities (consonant with snow leopard conservation), and recreational opportunities. Every range state has a part to play, and all ecological settings, as defined in the SLRAC 2008, will receive conservation effort, which further ensures that the widest range of ecosystem services are provided. Finally, expressing snow leopard conservation in these terms parallels the Redford et al. (2011) definition of successful conservation, which moves the conversation beyond a focus on avoided extinction to a proactive definition of why and where snow leopards must be conserved. Beyond these agreed terms, however, we see even greater opportunities. There appear to be enough populations in enough places that truly range-wide conservation of the species can be imagined. That is why we set the vision for the long-term conservation at the range-wide scale, with an emphasis not only on individual populations in individual places, but on interconnectivity between them. As Groves et al. (2003) describes, a good strategy includes articulating a vision, setting one or more time-bound goals, determining actions to achieve that goal, and mobilizing resources to execute those actions. The four snow leopard strategies outlined over the past decade-plus, in combination, articulate a way forward for
557
the larger conservation community – describing how the ends are achieved by the means, and enabling leaders to deploy resources wisely and effectively while coordinating among partners. Generals require strategies, but so do foot soldiers. Snow leopard conservation will be a long fight. Coordination and cooperation are key, but so are putting our values forward, so that we can enlist greater help and find greater success mobilizing the resources to enact our vision of a world where snow leopards and people coexist in perpetuity.
References Baillie, J., Groombridge, B. (Eds.), 1996. 1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland. Czech, B., Krausman, P.R., Borkhataria, R., 1998. Social construction, political power, and the allocation of benefits to endangered species. Conserv. Biol. 12, 1103–1112. Dinerstein, E., Loucks, C., Wikramanayake, E., Ginsberg, J., Sanderson, E., Seidensticker, J., Forrest, J., Bryia, G., Heydlauff, A., Klenzendorf, S., Leimbruber, P., Mills, J., O’Brien, T.G., Shrestha, M., Simons, R., Songer, M., 2007. The fate of wild tigers. BioScience 57, 508–514. Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E., Robinson, J.G., Karanth, K.U., Rabinowitz, A.R., Olson, D.M., Matthew, T., Hedao, P., Connor, M., 1997. A Framework for Identifying High Priority Areas and Actions for the Conservation of Tigers in the Wild. World Wildlife Fund-US, Wildlife Conservation Society, and National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s Save the Tiger Fund, Washington, DC. Durant, S., 2007. Range-wide conservation planning for cheetah and wild dog. Cat News 46, 13. Groves, C., The Nature Conservancy, Hunter, M., 2003. Drafting a Conservation Blueprint: A Practitioner’s Guide to Planning for Biodiversity, second ed. Island Press, Washington, DC. ExxonMobil. 2000. ExxonMobil Strengthens Commitment to Tiger Conservation; Company Has Committed $9 Million to Tiger Conservation Save The Tiger Fund Conservation Grants Announced – Press Releases on CSRwire. com. http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/25816ExxonMobil-Strengthens-Commitment-to-Tiger-Conservation-Company-Has-Committed-9-Million-to-TigerConservation-Save-The-Tiger-Fund-Conservation-GrantsAnnounced (accessed 27.07.2015). Groombridge, B. (Ed.), 1994. IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
558
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
Hidasi-Neto, J., Loyola, R., Cianciaruso, M.V., 2015. Global and local evolutionary and ecological distinctiveness of terrestrial mammals: identifying priorities across scales. Divers. Distrib. 21, 548–559. IUCN, 1990. 1990 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, UK. IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre. 1988. 1988 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources/United Nations Environment Programme, Gland, Switzerland. IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1986. 1986 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, UK. IUCN Species Survival Commission, 2000. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 3.1, Second edition IUCN Council, Gland, Switzerland. Jackson, R., D. Mallon, T. McCarthy, R.A. Chundaway, and B. Habib. 2008. Panthera uncia (Ounce, Snow Leopard). The IUCN Red List for Threatened Species, Verison 2015.4. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22732/0 (accessed 27.07.2015). Ladle, R.J., Jepson, P., 2008. Toward a biocultural theory of avoided extinction. Conserv. Lett. 1, 111–118. Leader-Williams, N., Adams, W.M., Smith, R.J. (Eds.), 2010. Trade-Offs in Conservation: Deciding What to Save. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK. McCarthy, T.M., Chapron, G., 2003. Snow Leopard Survival Strategy. International Snow Leopard Trust and Snow Leopard Network, Seattle, WA. McCarthy, T., Sanderson, E., Mallon, D., Fisher, K., Zahler, P., Hunter, L., 2009. Range-Wide Conservation Planning for the Snow Leopard. International Congress for Conservation Biology, Beijing, China. Mckeown, M., 2012. The Strategy Book. Pearson, New York. Mintzberg, H., Lampel, J.B., Quinn, J.B., Ghoshal, S., 2002. The Strategy Process: Concepts, Context, Cases. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Neel, M.C., Leidner, A.K., Haines, A., Goble, D.D., Scott, J.M., 2012. By the numbers: how is recovery defined by the US Endangered Species Act? BioScience 62, 646–657. Nowell, K., Bauer, H., 2006. Conservation Strategy for the Lion in Eastern and Southern Africa. IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland. Ray, J., Redford, K.H., Steneck, R., Berger, J. (Eds.), 2005. Large Carnivores and the Conservation of Biodiversity. Island Press, Washington, DC. Redford, K.H., Amato, G., Baillie, J., Beldomenico, P., Bennett, E.L., Clum, N., Cook, R., Fonseca, G., Hedges, S.,
Launay, F., Lieberman, S., Mace, G.M., Murayama, A., Putnam, A., Robinson, J.G., Rosenbaum, H., Sanderson, E.W., Stuart, S.N., Thomas, P., Thorbjarnarson, J., 2011. What does it mean to successfully conserve a (vertebrate) species? BioScience 61, 39–48. Sanderson, E.W., Redford, K.H., Chetkiewicz, C-L.B., Medellin, R.A., Rabinowitz, A.R., Robinson, J.G., Taber, A.B., 2002. Planning to save a species: the jaguar as a model. Conserv. Biol. 16, 58–72. Sanderson, E.W., 2006. How many animals do we want to save? the many ways of setting population target levels for animals. BioScience 57, 911–922. Sanderson, E., Forrest, J., Loucks, C., Ginsberg, J., Dinerstein, E., Seidensticker, J., Leimgruber, P., Songer, M., Heydlauff, A., O’Brien, T., Bryja, G., Klenzendorf, S., Wikramanayake, E., 2006. Setting priorities for the conservation and recovery of wild tigers: 2005-2015. The Technical Assessment. Wildlife Conservation Society, and World Wildlife Fund–US, and National Fish and Wildlife Foundation–Save the Tiger Fund, Washington, DC. Society for Conservation Biology., 2002, Jaguar conservation spotty, Science Daily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/01/020128080643.htm. Snow Leopard Network, 2014. Snow Leopard Survival Strategy. Revised Version 2014.1. Snow Leopard Network, Seattle, WA. Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, 2013. Global Snow Leopard and Ecosystem Protection Program (GSLEP): A New International Effort to Save the Snow Leopard and Conserve High-Mountain Ecosystems. Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic. Species Conservation Planning Task Force. 2008. Strategic Planning for Species Conservation: A Handbook. Version 1.0. IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC), Gland, Switzerland. http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/scshandbook_2_12_08_compressed.pdf (accessed 06.03.2015). Thesarus Linguae Graecae. 2011. στρaτηgίίa. The Thesarus Linguae Graecae Project, Irvine, CA. http://stephanus. tlg.uci.edu/lsj/#eid=99950&context=search (accessed 06.03.2015). Tzu, S., 2007. The Art of War. Filiquarian, Minneapolis, MN. Westwood, A., Reuchlin-Hugenholtz, E., Keith, D.M., 2014. Re-defining recovery: a generalized framework for assessing species recovery. Biol. Conserv. 172, 155–162. Williams, N., 2008. International Conference on Range-wide Conservation Planning for Snow Leopards: saving the species across its range. Cat News 48, 33–34. Wilson, E.O., 2003. The Future of Life. Vintage, New York.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
44
Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis Eric W. Sanderson*, David Mallon**, Thomas McCarthy†, Peter Zahler*, Kim Fisher* *WCS Asia Program, Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, NY, USA **Division of Biology and Conservation Ecology, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK † Snow Leopard Program, Panthera, New York, NY, USA
INTRODUCTION The idea of a strategy derives from the ancient Greek concept of “strategia,” or the art of the troop leader; that is, strategies are matter of command and generalship (Thesarus Linguae Graecae, 2011). Generals concern themselves with high-level decision making to obtain a specified objective, especially under conditions of uncertainty and limited resources where not every option can be pursued simultaneously. In military terms, strategy is distinguished from tactics, which are the subset of skills required to meet the objective, such as logistics or intelligence. The term first came into use in the Eastern
Snow Leopards http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802213-9.00044-4
Roman Empire around the sixth century and was only translated into the Western vernacular in the nineteenth century. Similar ideas have been articulated by great leaders in other parts of the world as well. In more recent times, the idea of strategy has left a purely military realm and entered politics, business, sports, and even conservation. A good strategy includes articulating a vision, setting one or more time-bound goals, determining actions to achieve that goal, and mobilizing resources to execute those actions (c.f. Groves et al., 2003). The strategy therefore describes how the ends are achieved by the means, and enables leaders to deploy resources wisely and effectively
543
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
544
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
while coordinating among partners. Sun Tzu, the famous Chinese strategist, wrote in the Art of War (2007) that unity, not size, is a source of strength. Mintzberg et al. (2002) defined strategy as “a pattern in a stream of decisions” not simply planning, while Mckeown (2012) argues that “strategy is about shaping the future,” achieving “desirable ends with available means.” Conservation of biological diversity is a desirable end, but it is sadly limited in its available means, especially given the rather ambitious goal of preserving the diversity of life on Earth for future generations (Wilson, 2003). Because conservation leaders in governments and other institutions constantly face decisions in a climate of uncertainty and limited resources, strategy is critical to the practice of conservation. Strategic planning often occurs as a mechanism for building consensus, enthusiasm, and support for conservation of a species (Sanderson et al., 2002). In the past, strategic planning efforts have led to renewed investments for tigers (ExxonMobil, 2000) and jaguars (Society for Conservation Biology, 2002). Most species are not so lucky. The vast majority of species lack explicit strategies for their conservation (Species Conservation Planning Task Force, 2008). As a result, conservation goals for most of biodiversity lack specificity beyond the implicit goal suggested by the IUCN Red List categories; that is, for taxa to be listed as “Species of Least Concern” and not something else (IUCN SSC, 2000). Least Concern species are not endangered, threatened, or vulnerable because they do not face a high risk of extinction in the wild. Avoiding imminent extinction does not seem to be a high bar for conservation (c.f. Westwood et al., 2014; Neel et al., 2012; Sanderson, 2006), but the finality of species extinction has successfully mobilized policy tools such as the US Endangered Species Act and the IUCN Red Listing process and continues to be an ideological mainstay of conservation (Neel et al., 2012; Ladle and Jepson, 2008). Snow leopards are
currently listed as endangered under the IUCN Red List process (Jackson et al., 2008), though one might question this listing, given that the species remains widely distributed in multiple populations (see Chapter 3). Although most conservationists would agree that avoiding species extinction is an immediate goal, it should not be the end goal for conservation (Sanderson, 2006). Redford et al. (2011), for example, suggest a more affirmative definition for successful species conservation. They write that any species that is successfully conserved will have the following characteristics: (i) be selfsustaining demographically and ecologically, (ii) be genetically robust, (iii) have healthy populations, (iv) have representative populations distributed across the historical range in ecologically representative settings, (v) have replicate populations within each ecological setting, and (vi) be resilient (i.e., able to continue to express key demographic, genetic, behavior, and ecological attributes even when disturbed by climate change or other factors) across the range. Snow leopards (Panthera uncia) are a species where considerable effort has been expended on strategic thinking by governments, conservation organizations, academic institutions, and development agencies, and where many of the components of the Redford et al. (2011) definition of successful conservation might be usefully applied. Just since 2000, four global strategies have been developed for the species: the Snow Leopard Survival Strategy (McCarthy and Chapron, 2003); the Snow Leopard Range-wide Assessment and Conservation Planning meeting in Beijing, China, in 2008 (Williams, 2008: McCarthy et al., 2009; see Chapter 3); the Global Snow Leopard and Ecosystem Protection Program (Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, 2013; see Chapter 45); and the Snow Leopard Survival Strategy, Revised Version 2014.1 (Snow Leopard Network, 2014). Hereafter these will be referred to as SLSS 2003, the SLRAC 2008, GSLEP 2013, and SLSS 2014, respectively. Many of these strategies pick up elements of the Redford et al. (2011)
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
Snow leopard strategies
prescription for successful conservation, while the exact elements and their construction into strategic formulations shows how snow leopard conservationists have evolved their strategic thinking over the past two decades. This chapter identifies areas of convergence and highlights points of divergence among these strategies by considering their goal/vision statements, especially those that address the “why,” “where,” and “how” of snow leopard conservation. “Why” refers to why people should invest effort in conserving the species; answers to “why snow leopard conservation” thus express the values the snow leopard strategists hold for snow leopards. Convergence of values among governments, scientists, conservationists, and communities suggests a basis for cooperation. “Where” refers to geographic representations of snow leopard range and conservation sites in the four conservation strategies. Understanding the distribution of snow leopard across an immense range (>3,000,000 km2), and showing how that range intersects with nation states and ecological settings, suggests where conservation efforts should be optimally distributed from a strategic perspective. “How” refers to the conservation activities necessary to fulfill the vision of conservation of the species. If why and where are strategic elements, then how brings in the logistics, including the kinds of expertise necessary for conservation of this species. More importantly, bringing the why, where, and how of snow leopard conservation together suggests an emerging strategic synthesis for snow leopard conservation against which future progress can be measured.
SNOW LEOPARD STRATEGIES Snow Leopard Survival Strategy (SLSS 2003) In 2002, approximately 58 snow leopard specialists, including researchers, advocates, and conservationists from range states and elsewhere
545
met in Seattle, USA, for the Snow Leopard Survival Summit. In a foreword to the first SLSS, Urs and Christine Breitenmoser wrote “that across mountain ridges and deserts, national borders and cultural barriers – the common values for which we fight, far outweigh the few differences that separate us.” What those values were was not clearly expressed, but the Executive Summary emphasizes that the SLSS is necessary to “save the endangered snow leopard” and the title of the volume (a “survival strategy”) suggests the main driver was avoiding extinction. This focus made sense at the time, because the snow leopard was listed as endangered again in 2002, just as it had been in 1986, 1988, 1990, 1994, and 1996 (Baillie and Groombridge, 1996; Groombridge, 1994; IUCN, 1990; IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1988; IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1986). As of July 2015, the snow leopard was still considered endangered. The latest assessment by Jackson et al. (2008) listed the species as endangered because the species was “suspected to have declined by 20% over the past two generations (16 years) due to habitat and prey base loss, and poaching and persecution,” and the global snow leopard effective population size was suspected to be fewer than 2500 individuals (Jackson et al., 2008). Given the IUCN status of the species, the SLSS 2003 set out the following tactical objectives (note, in this chapter, we distinguish between goals, which refer to the desired state of the species at some point in time, and objectives, which are activities to help achieve a desired state, which is somewhat different terminology that used by the SLSS 2003; for further discussion of the confusing terminology of conservation planning, see Sanderson, 2006, or Groves et al., 2003): • Assess and prioritize threats to snow leopards on a geographic basis. • Define and prioritize appropriate conservation, education, and policy measures appropriate to alleviate threats.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
546
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
FIGURE 44.1 Ecological settings defined for potential snow leopard range in 2008 at the Snow Leopard Range-wide Assessment and Conservation Planning (Williams 2008). Ecological settings are portions of the range where snow leopards have a distinct relationship to the prey and ecosystems where they live. Potential range is defined in Chapter 3.
• Prioritize subjects for snow leopard research and identify viable and preferred research methods. • Build a network of concerned scientists and conservationists to facilitate open dialogue and cross-border cooperation. • Gain consensus on a fundamental Snow Leopard Survival Strategy document that will be made available to the range states in conservation planning at national and local levels. The SLSS document itself satisfied the first three and the fifth objectives upon publication.
And the process of writing the SLSS 2003 was vital to creation of the Snow Leopard Network, which remains an active organization, satisfying the fourth objective (see Chapter 43). On its own terms, the SLSS 2003 was an immediate success. Geographically, the SLSS 2003 divided and assessed snow leopard range by political units (i.e., range states, or the countries where snow leopards have been reported). Status assessments were provided for 12 range states and one possible (Myanmar) (Fig. 44.1), and the legal status was reported for those 12 states. Threats and research needs were evaluated in four snow
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
Snow leopard strategies
leopard regions, which were agglomerations of nation states or parts of nation states. The SLSS 2003 thus set the precedent for thinking about snow leopard populations in biogeographic groupings that crossed international boundaries. These regions included the Himalaya (abbreviated HIMLY), including the Tibetan Plateau and other parts of southern China, India, Nepal, and Bhutan; the Karakorum and Hindu Kush Range (KK/HK), including Afghanistan, Pakistan, and southwest China; the Commonwealth of Independent States and western China (CISWC), including Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, and Xinjiang Province in China; and the northern snow leopard range (NRANG), which included China’s Altai and Tien Shan Mountains, Mongolia, and Russia. SLSS 2003 included a short section on “potential actions to address threats” that followed an extensive analysis of the threats to snow leopard conservation. The potential actions considered were grazing management, income generation (for people living near snow leopards), cottage industries, an ungulate trophy hunting program (recognizing the competition between human hunters and snow leopards for the same prey), reducing poaching and trade in snow leopard parts, reducing livestock depredation by snow leopards, animal husbandry (for livestock), and conservation education and awareness. Each action type was addressed at the policy and local community level. The remainder of the strategy was given to identification of research and information needs and a short section range state action planning.
Snow Leopard Survival Strategy, Revised Version 2014.1 (SLSS 2014) The Snow Leopard Network, which formed after the first SLSS meeting, published an updated SLSS in 2014. Interestingly, in the update the values for snow leopards were recast in a more positive light and to give a wider perspective, in keeping with the GSLEP 2013 (Global Snow Leopard and
547
Ecosystem Protection Program; see following), which was being developed concurrently. Endangerment is not mentioned; rather SLSS 2014 emphasizes the iconic nature of the cat and its ecological dependency on prey species and healthy rangelands. The passage is worth quoting in full: The iconic snow leopard is the least known of the “big cats” due to its elusive nature, secretive habits and the remote and challenging terrain it inhabits. As an apex predator, its survival depends on healthy populations of mountain ungulates, the major prey; these in turn depend on the availability of goodquality rangeland minimally degraded by concurrent use from livestock and humans. The snow leopard has a large home range size, so viable populations can be secured only across large landscapes. The snow leopard therefore represents the ideal flagship and umbrella species for the mountain ecosystems of Asia. Snow leopards share their range with pastoral communities who also require healthy rangelands to sustain their livestock and livelihoods. Moreover, these high altitude mountains and plateaus provide invaluable ecosystem services through carbon storage in peat lands and grasslands, and serve as Asia’s ‘water towers’, providing fresh water for hundreds of millions of people living downstream in Central, East and South Asia.
From this basis, SLSS 2014 reiterated the first three action-oriented goals of SLSS 2003 for the 2014 revision. No meeting was held because the process was conducted in parallel with the GSLEP 2013 strategy, which included a large international meeting in October 2013 of many of the same people and institutions. The revised SLSS provided updated status assessments for 12 countries and mentioned Myanmar as a possible, but unlikely, range state. Threats and research needs were addressed as a series of chapters on a range-wide scale, though some chapters and the three appendices included data by nation and subnation (e.g., regions within China), including a valuable list of camera trapping studies and a list of protected areas where snow leopards are known to occur. In general the approach to snow leopard geography emphasized political boundaries based on range states.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
548
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
SLSS 2014, like its predecessor, included a review of threats to the species, along with a revised set of action items for each threat. Chapters were dedicated to explaining and suggesting action-oriented responses to livestock competition, illegal trade, climate change, and large-scale infrastructure development, including mining, electrical power infrastructure, and linear barriers (e.g., railroads, highways, fences). A separate chapter titled “Conservation Actions” focused on community-based conservation efforts to help local people see the presence of wild snow leopards as beneficial or at least neutral. These include handicrafts, savings and credit programs, corral improvements, livestock insurance, veterinary assistance, ecotourism, and education and awareness-raising.
Snow Leopard Range-wide Assessment and Conservation Planning (2008) In 2008, a similar but not identical group of researchers, conservationists, and government officials met in Beijing, China, at a meeting organized by Panthera, the Snow Leopard Network, Snow Leopard Trust (SLT), and the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) (Williams, 2008; McCarthy et al., 2009; see Chapter 3). The purpose of this meeting was to develop a rangewide assessment and conservation vision for the snow leopard, using procedures described by the SSC (2008) and in related planning efforts for large wild felids, including jaguars (Sanderson et al., 2002), lions (IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group, 2006), cheetahs (Durant, 2007), and tigers (Sanderson et al., 2006; Dinerstein et al., 2007). Working together, this group prepared a conservation vision statement for the snow leopard, explicitly linked back to datasets developed through the range-wide assessment: A world where snow leopards and their wild prey thrive in healthy mountain ecosystems across all major ecological settings of their entire range, and where snow leopards are revered as unique ecological, economic, aesthetic and spiritual assets.
A vision like this one represents an aspirational state, which may never be realized, but whose expressed values guide conservation efforts. In this vision statement, snow leopards, their wild (as opposed to domesticated) prey, and healthy mountain ecosystems are considered a joint unit for conservation. Multiple instances of this unit are valued across different “ecological settings” that collectively encompass the entire range. In other words, one example population, or even several in the same ecological circumstances, would not satisfy the vision statement. Rather, variable combinations of snow leopards, prey, and “healthy mountain ecosystems” are desired. At the Beijing meeting, these were described as regions where snow leopards display ecological characteristics or interactions not found in other parts of the range. These could include different habitat usage patterns, different prey base, different home ranges or dispersal patterns, or different behavioral repertoires. To bring even greater clarity, the vision statement was directly linked to a map that described seven ecological settings that collectively span the potential range of the species. The experts assembled at that meeting created consensus maps displaying snow leopard conservation units (SLCUs), ecological settings, and the potential range of the species (Fig. 44.2) (see Chapter 3). The ecological values of snow leopards were explicitly coupled with other kinds of values, including both material (ecological and economic) and nonmaterial (aesthetic and spiritual) benefits to people. The language is unusual, coupling a spiritual concept, “reverence,” with an economic one, “assets.” After consideration of a conservation vision for the species, the research community was joined by representatives from most of the range states to develop country-specific action plans. Those action plans highlighted a wide variety of conservation actions for snow leopards as indicated in Table 44.3.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
Snow leopard strategies
549
FIGURE 44.2 Snow leopard range states. Range states are countries that overlap the potential distribution of snow leopards as shown in Figure 44.1.
Global Snow Leopard and Ecosystem Protection Program (GSLEP) (2013) In October 2013, representatives of 12 range state nations and a variety of snow leopard conservation and ecosystem protection partner organizations (similar but not identical to the groups that produced the SLSS 2003 and the SLRAC 2008) met in Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic, to launch a new international effort to save the snow leopard and conserve high-mountain ecosystems (see Chapter 45). This process was aimed at creating a policy framework for snow leopard conservation among range state
governments. To that end, an important output of the meeting was the jointly agreed Bishkek Declaration on the Conservation of Snow Leopards, which acknowledged that snow leopards were: “. . . an irreplaceable symbol of our nation’s natural and cultural heritage and an indicator of the health and sustainability of mountain ecosystems” and recognized that mountain ecosystems inhabited by snow leopards provide “essential ecosystem services, including storing and releasing water . . ., sustaining pastoral and agricultural livelihoods … ; and offering inspiration, recreation, and economic opportunities.”
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
550
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
Thus the Bishkek Declaration creates a symbolic relationship between the conservation of snow leopards and the ecosystem services provided by snow leopard habitat. The Bishkek Declaration was published with an extensive report describing the new program. The first chapter expresses the same idea as the SLRAC 2008 that snow leopards, their wild prey, and their ecosystems form a joint unit for conservation. It goes on to elaborate on the various ecosystem services provided to people in Central and South Asia by this unit, including cultural services, water services, biodiversity, medicine, agro-pastoralism, carbon sequestration and storage, and recreation and economic opportunities. The report argues that “many of the threats to snow leopards and to their prey and ecosystems have the potential to degrade the provisioning of these ecosystem services.” To address where to conserve snow leopards, the GSLEP described an explicit goal called “20 by 2020,” which states:
enabling activities for snow leopard conservation, namely:
The goal of GSLEP is for the 12 range countries, with support from interested organizations, to work together to identify and secure 20 snow leopard landscapes across the big cat’s range by 2020.
WHY CONSERVE SNOW LEOPARDS?
Secure snow leopard landscapes are defined as those that (i) contain at least 100 breeding age snow leopards conserved with the involvement of local communities, (ii) support adequate and secure prey populations, and (iii) have functional connectivity to other snow leopard landscapes, some of which cross international boundaries (Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, 2013). A proposed set of 23 landscapes were described on a map that collectively ensure that the 12 nations that have supported the Bishkek Declaration each have at least one area important for snow leopards. Conservation of these areas is described under the slogan: “Secure 20 by 2020.” Actually securing snow leopard landscapes of course requires actions on the ground. The Bishkek Declaration recognized this by describing a set of five direct impact activities and three
1. Engaging local communities in conservation, including promoting sustainable livelihoods, and addressing human-wildlife conflict 2. Managing habitat and prey based upon monitoring and evaluation of populations and range areas 3. Combatting poaching and illegal trade 4. Transboundary management and enforcement 5. Engaging industry 6. Building capacity and enhancing conservation policies and institutions 7. Research and monitoring 8. Building awareness These eight activities were further elaborated in the GSLEP 2013 as a set of “good practices for snow leopard, prey, and habitat conservation” and a further set of activity “portfolios.”
The four strategies describe a set of broadly shared values for snow leopards, which have evolved over the first decade and a half of the twenty-first century (Table 44.1). In the SLSS 2003, the values of snow leopard conservation were largely implicit. A group of people who already shared in an interest in conservation and feared for the future of the species gathered together to make a strategy for conservation. Their efforts were largely tactically focused: What does the conservation community know about snow leopards? What are the most important threats and places? How do we cooperate better to save the species? Values and geographies were not expressed explicitly. It is not surprising therefore that the SLRAC 2008 planning meeting attempted to fill gaps in the earlier work by making an explicit value statement through a vision statement, and a more exact description of the geography
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
551
Where to conserve snow leopards?
TABLE 44.1 Comparison of Values for Snow Leopards in Four Twenty-First-Century Conservation Strategies Conservation value
SLSS 2003
SLRAC 2008
GSLEP 2013
SLSS 2014
Avoid extinction; existence value
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
Ecological functionality of species
X
Ecosystem services of habitat
[X]
X
X
Cultural significance
X
X
X
Representation on an ecological basis
X X
X
Representation on a national basis
[X]
[X]
[X], Implicit values in the strategies, as interpreted by the authors; X, Explicit values stated in the strategies.
through a well-established and globally recognized range-wide assessment process (e.g., Sanderson et al., 2002). This process carried with it an emphasis on ecological, as opposed to political, geography. This idea can trace its origins back to work on tigers in the 1990s (e.g., Dinerstein et al., 1997), which was replicated and refined through work on other large cats (e.g., jaguars – Sanderson et al., 2002; lions – Nowell and Bauer, 2006). The Beijing vision statement asserts the importance of the shared conservation units comprised of snow leopards and their prey and the mountain ecosystems where they live. Multiple instances of these units are desired for conservation across the range, an idea later expressed more generally for all species by Redford et al. (2011). The GSLEP 2013 and SLSS 2014 further build and expand on the idea of a conservation unit by placing snow leopard conservation in the context of ecosystem services. The “reverence” for snow leopards as “assets” in the SLRAC 2008 vision has been complemented by a carefully articulated argument for ecosystem services delivered both to people who share snow leopard range and the millions that benefit from mountain “water towers” downstream. Nearly one-third of the world’s current human population draws power, irrigation, industrial waters, and fishery benefits from snow leopard habitat (GSLEP, 2013). SLSS 2014 represents the leading expression of this concept to date by chaining the ideas
together logically. The snow leopard as a predator depends on wild prey (largely grazing and browsing ungulates), which in turn depend on functioning mountain ecosystems. Functioning mountain ecosystems also provide carbon storage, water, and agro-pastoral opportunities for local, often impoverished, communities. It is clear from this logic, as elaborated in the four strategies and other chapters of this book, that snow leopards are dependent on functioning mountain ecosystems in Asia. It is perhaps less clear that the ecosystems are dependent on snow leopards as such (see relevant discussion in Ray et al., 2005). No one claims that snow leopards directly provide water or sequester much carbon. What depends on snow leopards in particular are the cultural values of the species, whether we describe these as “cultural services” or “revered assets” or “existence values.” Snow leopards are beautiful, valuable, and iconic in their own right, and they are also symbolic of the beautiful, valuable, iconic ecosystems where they live.
WHERE TO CONSERVE SNOW LEOPARDS? The strategies express two different ways of framing the geography of species conservation: conservation by nation state or conservation by ecological setting (Table 44.2). Three of the four strategies considered here adopt contemporary
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
552
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
TABLE 44.2 Geographic Treatment of Snow Leopard Range in Four Twenty-First-Century Conservation Strategies Geographic description
SLSS 2003
SLRAC 2008
GSLEP 2013
SLSS 2014
By nation states
13*
11**
12***
13
By ecological region or setting
4 regions
9 ecological settings
None
None
Number of units, areas or landscapes
None
69 snow leopard conservation units
20 snow leopard landscapes
186 protected areas
3,024,728
3,256,840
Not given
1,200,000–3,000,000+
1,846,000
1,230,881****
1,766,000
Various
Extent of potential range (km2) 2
Extent of occupied habitat (km )
* Afghanistan, Bhutan, China, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Myanmar, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. ** Kazakhstan and Myanmar were not represented. *** Myanmar was not represented. **** Definitive plus probable range (see Chapter 3).
political geography as the frame for conserving a species that evolved over 2 million years (see Chapter 1). A political perspective dominates because human decision making about conservation is in fact political and state specific; no country has no formal influence on what happens beyond its boundaries except through international agreements between sovereign states (such as the Bishkek Declaration). Political cooperation is necessary because snow leopards often inhabit transboundary mountains, where high ridges demarcate polities as well as watersheds. Moreover cooperation is necessary, across nations and across sectors, also because the limited resources for snow leopard conservation and the immensity of the task require pooling resources together. The main difficulty with politically defined goals for conservation is that they may be hindered by other aspects of the political process that have nothing to do with conservation (Leader-Williams et al., 2010; Czech et al., 1998). Other political priorities may and do intervene, leading to science being sidelined or ignored, and/or limiting participation. The GSLEP 2013 landscapes, for example, identify only a few marginal areas in China, despite the fact that science clearly indicates that broad swaths of China are important snow leopard habitat. The opposite can also occur. No one knows the scientific status of the small corner of potential range
in Myanmar where the species might occur, so that country did not participate in the GSLEP process. An ecological lens on snow leopard geography is complementary to a politically oriented system of conservation priorities and less subject to political factors that have nothing to do with conservation. Ecological conservation focuses on what makes a particular conservation unit (e.g., snow leopards, prey, ecosystem characteristics) distinctive in terms consistent with long-term co-evolution of the species and other aspects of the ecosystem (Dinerstein et al., 1997; Sanderson et al., 2002). Distinctiveness can be defined in terms of predator-prey relations, habitat use, behavioral differences, or for ecosystems, differences in provisioned ecosystem services (c.f. Hidasi-Neto et al., 2015). Once one has the concept of ecological distinctiveness within a species, and mechanisms to define it, then one can also express goals for conservation in terms of the ecology of the species. These logical interconnections are all deeply satisfying to scientifically minded conservationists. For example, in the SLRAC 2008, that expression is a vision to conserve areas important for snow leopards within the seven major ecological settings defined across the entire potential range of the species. The implicit rationale is that conservation of these areas will conserve snow leopards, evolutionary potential, ecological functionality, and
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
Where to conserve snow leopards?
553
FIGURE 44.3 Geographic overlap between the “20 by 2020 snow leopard landscapes” defined GSLEP 2013 (Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, 2013) and the snow leopard conservation units defined by SLRAC 2008 (Williams, 2008). A snow leopard conservation unit was defined as a Type I if it contains a population of resident snow leopards large enough to be potentially self-sustaining over the next 100 years (note this implies a stable prey base by definition); Type II if it contains fewer snow leopards than Type I (i.e., not self-sustaining for 100 years), but with adequate habitat such that snow leopard numbers could increase if threats were alleviated; or Type III, if snow leopards are definitely extant in the area, but have inadequate habitat or wild prey, or the population is too small or too threatened to be considered viable over the long-term without large investments to reduce threats in the short term (see Chapter 3).
provide the widest possible diversity of ecosystem services. The disadvantage of the ecological approach to conservation is that no one person or organization has responsibility for snow leopards in, for example, the Himalayas. Cooperation is required. The best of all possible worlds is to find overlap between ecological and political conservation priorities. Comparison of the snow leopard
conservation units produced in Beijing and the snow leopard landscapes produced in Bishkek shows that there is substantial overlap, especially through the mountain ranges that ring the range (Fig. 44.3). There are many more SLRAC snow leopard conservation units (69) than the GSLEP’s 23 “20 by 2020 landscapes,” but the landscapes make up for that by crossing or encompassing multiple conservation units. The only area where there is not
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
554
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
substantive agreement is in China, where the GSLEP process analysis shows only three landscape, while the conservation units from the SLRAC 2008 are numerous, varied, and in the case of the Tibetan Plateau, geographically enormous.
HOW TO CONSERVE SNOW LEOPARDS? There is no one way to conserve snow leopards; there are lots of ways. One might expect a diversity of conservation approaches given the vast geography of the species, encompassing not only many different ecologically distinct mountain ranges, but also many different countries and cultures. The art of the conservation strategist is picking the right approach in the right place and the right time (often in an environment of constrained resources). Fortunately, a wide range of different activities have been suggested to conserve snow leopards – a virtual panoply of twenty-first-century conservation strategies – and many of them have been tried in different places, at different times, and by different organizations. Table 44.3 combines the suggested conservation activities from these four strategies into a coherent framework. Only three approaches to snow leopard conservation are shared across all four strategies: local community involvement, capacity building for snow leopard conservation, and improved implementation of treaty obligations (e.g., CITES, CMS) on behalf of signatory snow leopard range states. Fourteen other approaches are endorsed by three of the strategies. Detailing these shared approaches is beyond the scope of this chapter, but they are discussed in other chapters of this book (e.g., Chapters 13, 14, and 16).
A STRATEGIC SYNTHESIS Given the evolving expressions of values for snow leopard conservation and the significant overlap in conservation geography among the
four strategies, the snow leopard conservation community is well placed for a strategic synthesis. Table 44.1 shows how the values for snow leopard conservation have evolved over time, to the current emphasis on the cultural values of snow leopards and the ecosystem services of the mountain ecosystems they represent. Table 44.2 indicates the many opportunities for snow leopard conservation, which can be framed in overlapping political and ecological geographies. Table 44.3 suggests agreement on a small number of approaches to range-wide conservation (community engagement, capacity building, international agreements), and many other approaches that are recommended across multiple strategies. On the basis of these similarities, we believe that the snow leopard conservation community is poised for a global strategic synthesis. We suggest the following vision statement, which draws from the four strategies and represents a shared aspirational state of the species in the future: A world where snow leopards and their wild prey thrive in healthy mountain ecosystems across the full extent of snow leopard’s potential range and where those interconnected ecosystems provide ecological, economic, aesthetic and cultural benefits to people in the mountains and downstream watersheds.
As a goal, the show leopard conservationists and range states should commit to: By 2025, to have successfully conserved snow leopard populations with their wild prey in nationally and ecologically representative, healthy mountain landscapes that ensure range-wide connectivity and that provide abundant ecosystem services to local and downstream populations.
Expressing the goal in the context of the four strategies enables conservation “generals” working in governments, conservation organizations, and civil society to divide and conquer the conservation problem. Terms are now well defined. Everyone agrees that there should be
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
555
A strategic synthesis
TABLE 44.3 Comparison of Suggested Actions for Snow Leopard Conservation in Four Twenty-First-Century Conservation Strategies Actions to conserve snow leopards
SLSS 2003
SLRAC 2008
GSLEP 2013
SLSS 2014
X
X
X
X
X
X
Engaging local communities in conservation Use participatory approach, integrate community needs into snow leopard conservation Employ community-based conflict mitigation/resolution Improve livestock husbandry, including monitoring of depredation events
X
Livestock insurance/compensation and vaccination programs linked to snow leopard conservation
X
X X
X
Support construction of predator proof corrals
X
X
X
Encourage alternative livelihoods for local communities other than livestock grazing, including savings and credit programs and ecotourism
X
X
X
Work on climate change adaptation strategies with communities
X
Managing habitat and prey based on scientific monitoring Establish long-term monitoring of snow leopard, prey, and habitat
X
X
Create/enhance/expand protected area networks
X
X
Create management and monitoring plans for existing protected areas Support sustainable pasture and grazing management
X X
Support restoration in degraded landscapes to attain snow leopard conservation Manage ungulate trophy hunting programs in a sustainable way compatible with snow leopard needs
X X
X
Also see section: Build capacity and enhance conservation policies and institutions.
X
X
X
X
X
Combatting poaching and illegal trade Improve/enforce laws on conservation, hunting/poaching, trade
X
Education and outreach to relevant communities (e.g., development agencies, military, tourists) Regularly monitor markets for illegal snow leopard and prey parts
X X
X
Also see section: Engaging local communities activities.
X
X
X
Also see section: Transboundary management and enforcement.
X
X
X
X
X
X
Also see section: Build capacity and enhance conservation policies and institutions.
X
(Continued)
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
556
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
TABLE 44.3 Comparison of Suggested Actions for Snow Leopard Conservation in Four Twenty-First-Century Conservation Strategies (cont.) Actions to conserve snow leopards
SLSS 2003
SLRAC 2008
GSLEP 2013
Initiate/enhance transboundary cooperation, including bilateral and multilateral agreements
X
X
Foster a landscape level approach to conservation, including no net-loss policies for biodiversity
X
X
SLSS 2014
Transboundary management and enforcement
Capacity building for border and customs officials
X
Establish transboundary protected areas
X
X
Engaging industry in snow leopard conservation Use snow leopards as indicator species of impacts of development
X
Invite industrial officials to relevant snow leopard conservation events
X
Consult with development-oriented ministries regarding snow leopard conservation priority areas, including through the Environmental and Social Assessment process
X
X
X
X
X
X
Build capacity and enhance conservation policies and institutions Improve treaty (e.g., CITES, CMS) implementation
X
Improve and strengthen national laws regarding snow leopard conservation
X
Build national capacity for research, monitoring and enforcement, including workshops and seminars
X
X
X
X
Develop/implement National Snow Leopard Action Plan
X
X
Establish rescue centers for rehabilitation of orphan cubs, injured adults
X
Also see section: Build awareness of snow leopards and snow leopard conservation efforts.
X
Research and monitoring Assess status of snow leopards, prey, and habitat relative to conservation goals
X
Assess impact of climate change on snow leopards, prey, and habitat
X
X
X
X
X
Build awareness of snow leopards and snow leopard conservation efforts Establish awareness campaigns to facilitate snow leopard conservation at all levels
X
Provide educational materials to schools about snow leopard conservation
X
X
Also see section: Engage local communities activities.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
X X
X
REFERENCES
enough snow leopards to ensure long-term population viability of at least representative populations on a national and ecological basis and across the entire range (see Chapter 3). Moreover, successfully conserved snow leopard prey populations should be abundant enough so that snow leopards do not depend on domesticated animals, but can maintain themselves on wild prey alone (see Chapter 4). Successful conservation includes enforced legal protections that prohibit snow leopard hunting and trade (see Chapter 18), and manage harvest of prey species sustainably (see Chapter 16). Successfully conserved healthy mountain landscapes provide ecosystem services such as water provision, carbon sequestration, agro-pastoral opportunities (consonant with snow leopard conservation), and recreational opportunities. Every range state has a part to play, and all ecological settings, as defined in the SLRAC 2008, will receive conservation effort, which further ensures that the widest range of ecosystem services are provided. Finally, expressing snow leopard conservation in these terms parallels the Redford et al. (2011) definition of successful conservation, which moves the conversation beyond a focus on avoided extinction to a proactive definition of why and where snow leopards must be conserved. Beyond these agreed terms, however, we see even greater opportunities. There appear to be enough populations in enough places that truly range-wide conservation of the species can be imagined. That is why we set the vision for the long-term conservation at the range-wide scale, with an emphasis not only on individual populations in individual places, but on interconnectivity between them. As Groves et al. (2003) describes, a good strategy includes articulating a vision, setting one or more time-bound goals, determining actions to achieve that goal, and mobilizing resources to execute those actions. The four snow leopard strategies outlined over the past decade-plus, in combination, articulate a way forward for
557
the larger conservation community – describing how the ends are achieved by the means, and enabling leaders to deploy resources wisely and effectively while coordinating among partners. Generals require strategies, but so do foot soldiers. Snow leopard conservation will be a long fight. Coordination and cooperation are key, but so are putting our values forward, so that we can enlist greater help and find greater success mobilizing the resources to enact our vision of a world where snow leopards and people coexist in perpetuity.
References Baillie, J., Groombridge, B. (Eds.), 1996. 1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland. Czech, B., Krausman, P.R., Borkhataria, R., 1998. Social construction, political power, and the allocation of benefits to endangered species. Conserv. Biol. 12, 1103–1112. Dinerstein, E., Loucks, C., Wikramanayake, E., Ginsberg, J., Sanderson, E., Seidensticker, J., Forrest, J., Bryia, G., Heydlauff, A., Klenzendorf, S., Leimbruber, P., Mills, J., O’Brien, T.G., Shrestha, M., Simons, R., Songer, M., 2007. The fate of wild tigers. BioScience 57, 508–514. Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E., Robinson, J.G., Karanth, K.U., Rabinowitz, A.R., Olson, D.M., Matthew, T., Hedao, P., Connor, M., 1997. A Framework for Identifying High Priority Areas and Actions for the Conservation of Tigers in the Wild. World Wildlife Fund-US, Wildlife Conservation Society, and National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s Save the Tiger Fund, Washington, DC. Durant, S., 2007. Range-wide conservation planning for cheetah and wild dog. Cat News 46, 13. Groves, C., The Nature Conservancy, Hunter, M., 2003. Drafting a Conservation Blueprint: A Practitioner’s Guide to Planning for Biodiversity, second ed. Island Press, Washington, DC. ExxonMobil. 2000. ExxonMobil Strengthens Commitment to Tiger Conservation; Company Has Committed $9 Million to Tiger Conservation Save The Tiger Fund Conservation Grants Announced – Press Releases on CSRwire. com. http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/25816ExxonMobil-Strengthens-Commitment-to-Tiger-Conservation-Company-Has-Committed-9-Million-to-TigerConservation-Save-The-Tiger-Fund-Conservation-GrantsAnnounced (accessed 27.07.2015). Groombridge, B. (Ed.), 1994. IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards
558
44. Global Strategies for Snow Leopard Conservation: A Synthesis
Hidasi-Neto, J., Loyola, R., Cianciaruso, M.V., 2015. Global and local evolutionary and ecological distinctiveness of terrestrial mammals: identifying priorities across scales. Divers. Distrib. 21, 548–559. IUCN, 1990. 1990 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, UK. IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre. 1988. 1988 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources/United Nations Environment Programme, Gland, Switzerland. IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1986. 1986 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, UK. IUCN Species Survival Commission, 2000. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 3.1, Second edition IUCN Council, Gland, Switzerland. Jackson, R., D. Mallon, T. McCarthy, R.A. Chundaway, and B. Habib. 2008. Panthera uncia (Ounce, Snow Leopard). The IUCN Red List for Threatened Species, Verison 2015.4. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22732/0 (accessed 27.07.2015). Ladle, R.J., Jepson, P., 2008. Toward a biocultural theory of avoided extinction. Conserv. Lett. 1, 111–118. Leader-Williams, N., Adams, W.M., Smith, R.J. (Eds.), 2010. Trade-Offs in Conservation: Deciding What to Save. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK. McCarthy, T.M., Chapron, G., 2003. Snow Leopard Survival Strategy. International Snow Leopard Trust and Snow Leopard Network, Seattle, WA. McCarthy, T., Sanderson, E., Mallon, D., Fisher, K., Zahler, P., Hunter, L., 2009. Range-Wide Conservation Planning for the Snow Leopard. International Congress for Conservation Biology, Beijing, China. Mckeown, M., 2012. The Strategy Book. Pearson, New York. Mintzberg, H., Lampel, J.B., Quinn, J.B., Ghoshal, S., 2002. The Strategy Process: Concepts, Context, Cases. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Neel, M.C., Leidner, A.K., Haines, A., Goble, D.D., Scott, J.M., 2012. By the numbers: how is recovery defined by the US Endangered Species Act? BioScience 62, 646–657. Nowell, K., Bauer, H., 2006. Conservation Strategy for the Lion in Eastern and Southern Africa. IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland. Ray, J., Redford, K.H., Steneck, R., Berger, J. (Eds.), 2005. Large Carnivores and the Conservation of Biodiversity. Island Press, Washington, DC. Redford, K.H., Amato, G., Baillie, J., Beldomenico, P., Bennett, E.L., Clum, N., Cook, R., Fonseca, G., Hedges, S.,
Launay, F., Lieberman, S., Mace, G.M., Murayama, A., Putnam, A., Robinson, J.G., Rosenbaum, H., Sanderson, E.W., Stuart, S.N., Thomas, P., Thorbjarnarson, J., 2011. What does it mean to successfully conserve a (vertebrate) species? BioScience 61, 39–48. Sanderson, E.W., Redford, K.H., Chetkiewicz, C-L.B., Medellin, R.A., Rabinowitz, A.R., Robinson, J.G., Taber, A.B., 2002. Planning to save a species: the jaguar as a model. Conserv. Biol. 16, 58–72. Sanderson, E.W., 2006. How many animals do we want to save? the many ways of setting population target levels for animals. BioScience 57, 911–922. Sanderson, E., Forrest, J., Loucks, C., Ginsberg, J., Dinerstein, E., Seidensticker, J., Leimgruber, P., Songer, M., Heydlauff, A., O’Brien, T., Bryja, G., Klenzendorf, S., Wikramanayake, E., 2006. Setting priorities for the conservation and recovery of wild tigers: 2005-2015. The Technical Assessment. Wildlife Conservation Society, and World Wildlife Fund–US, and National Fish and Wildlife Foundation–Save the Tiger Fund, Washington, DC. Society for Conservation Biology., 2002, Jaguar conservation spotty, Science Daily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/01/020128080643.htm. Snow Leopard Network, 2014. Snow Leopard Survival Strategy. Revised Version 2014.1. Snow Leopard Network, Seattle, WA. Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, 2013. Global Snow Leopard and Ecosystem Protection Program (GSLEP): A New International Effort to Save the Snow Leopard and Conserve High-Mountain Ecosystems. Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic. Species Conservation Planning Task Force. 2008. Strategic Planning for Species Conservation: A Handbook. Version 1.0. IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC), Gland, Switzerland. http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/scshandbook_2_12_08_compressed.pdf (accessed 06.03.2015). Thesarus Linguae Graecae. 2011. στρaτηgίίa. The Thesarus Linguae Graecae Project, Irvine, CA. http://stephanus. tlg.uci.edu/lsj/#eid=99950&context=search (accessed 06.03.2015). Tzu, S., 2007. The Art of War. Filiquarian, Minneapolis, MN. Westwood, A., Reuchlin-Hugenholtz, E., Keith, D.M., 2014. Re-defining recovery: a generalized framework for assessing species recovery. Biol. Conserv. 172, 155–162. Williams, N., 2008. International Conference on Range-wide Conservation Planning for Snow Leopards: saving the species across its range. Cat News 48, 33–34. Wilson, E.O., 2003. The Future of Life. Vintage, New York.
VII. The Future of Snow Leopards