2

Newcastle University’s Snow leopard Research Expedition Report: Kazakhstan 2004

Harry Collinson Travel Scholarship Newcastle University Biology, Geography and Agriculture Departments Newcastle

Youth Activity Fund, Explorers Club, USA Gilchrist Educational Trust

Albert Reckitt Charitable Trust Earth and Space Foundation

Newcastle University Expeditions Committee

Location:Dzhungarian range, south eastern Kazakhstan

13th July-14th September 2004

Aim:

To review conflict between man and snow leopard in the western region of the Dzhungarian Alatau range

Report Author- Michael Riddell- Upper Chesthill Cottage, Glen Lyon,

Aberfeldy, Perthshire, PH15 2NH

Scotland Mobile- 07834695967 E mail: riddellmichael@yahoo.co.uk

http://www.mikeriddell.co.uk

3

CONTENTS1. Abstract 2. Introduction

2.1. Objectives2.2. Snow leopards: An introduction

2.2.1. Snow leopards in Kazakhstan 2.3. Threats to snow leopards

2.3.1. A: Conflict with herders 2.3.2. B: Loss of natural prey base

2.3.2.1. Disturbance and overgrazing 2.3.2.2. Loss of natural prey base due to hunting

2.3.3. C: Habitat loss, fragmentation and geographical range 2.3.4. D: Non- selective killing: traps and poison 2.3.5. E: Trapping and killing for trade

2.4. Cost of predation- Comparative reports of retaliatory kills and livestock losses 2.5. Factors effecting predation 2.6. Local perception of snow leopards 2.7. Central Asian Republics and the Russian Federation: Snow leopards in Kazakhstan since

independence 2.7.1. Kazakhstan 2.7.2. Snow leopards in the Dzhungarian Alatau 2.7.3. Research in Kazakhstan 2.7.4. Newcastle University’s Initiative

2.8. Regional geography 2.8.1. Study area 2.8.2. Dzhungaria Mountains 2.8.3. Research sites

2.9. Map and study area 2.10. Kazakhstan and the Dzhungarian Maountains protected status 2.11. Infrastructure of lowland areas 2.12. Flora and fauna

3. Personnel4. Kazakhstan 5. Methods

5.1. Semi-structured interviews 5.2. Participatory learning and action tools 5.3. Key informant interviews 5.4. Prey counts

6. Synthesis 7. Map Key 8. Results

8.1. Transhumance 8.2. Stakeholders 8.3. Conflict with herders

8.3.1. Cost of predation 8.3.2. Average livestock prices 8.3.3. Herders income 8.3.4. Wolves and bears 8.3.5. Attributing kills 8.3.6. Factors affecting predation

8.4. Demographics: Overgrazing and disturbance 8.4.1. Disturbance 8.4.2. Overgrazing

8.5. Geography of the Dzhungarian Mountains: Habitat loss and fragmentation 8.6. Snow leopard sightings

8.6.1. Sightings

4

8.6.2. Interviews and snow leopard sightings 8.6.3. Historical Records of snow leopard Numbers in the Dzhungarian Alatau

8.7. Loss of natural prey base 8.7.1. Local hunting 8.7.2. Hunting in the past- interviews 8.7.3. Prey counts and local animals distribution 8.7.4. Prey counts: general comments 8.7.5. Dzhungarian Alatau Mammal List

8.8. Non-selective killing (traps and poison) and trapping and killing for trade 8.9. Local wildlife perceptions

8.9.1. Proposed reasons for perceptions 8.9.2. Perceptions of snow leopards versus predation

8.10. Other results and information 8.10.1. Tolerance to predation 8.10.2. Herder’s employment

8.11. Local awareness of protected areas status 8.11.1. Awareness of protected areas status 8.11.2. Attitudes towards protected area status 8.11.3. Non-use values 8.11.4. Other uses of wildlife 8.11.5. Medicinal uses of local fauna and mythology 8.11.6. Conservation initiatives

8.12. Ecological rangers- Key informant interviews 9. Summary of results 10. Fieldwork improvements 11. Discussion

11.1. Conflict with herders: Cost of predation 11.1.1. Bear and wolf predation

11.2. Disturbance and overgrazing 11.3. Habitat loss, fragmentation and range geography 11.4. Snow leopard sightings and densities 11.5. Loss of natural prey base through hunting

11.5.1. Other predators 11.5.2. Prey counts

11.6. Non-selective killing (traps and poison) and trapping and killing for trade 11.7. Attitudes towards wildlife and the protected area 11.8. Ecological rangers 11.9. Summary

12. Dissemination12.1. Present threats to snow leopard: Ranking conflicts 12.2. Root causes of conflict 12.3. Dispelling conflicts

13. Recommendations for action around and within the Dzhungaria 13.1. Strengthening law enforcement capacity

13.1.1. Protected Status of the Jungar Mountains (and improving law enforcement) 13.1.2. Accurate snow leopard monitoring 13.1.3. Trans-boundary protection

13.2. Strengthening national legislation and conservation policies 13.3. Providing human communities living locally to snow leopard with economic incentives for their

conservation 13.3.1. Role of ecotourism

13.4. Raising awareness of the threats to snow leopards 13.5. Conclusion: Summary of Recommendations

14. Scientific conclusion 15. Exploration in the Dzhungaria

5

16. Administration and logistics 16.1. Equipment report 16.2. NOMADUK Fleeces 16.3. Permissions 16.4. Research material and communications 16.5. Safety and training 16.6. Medical arrangements 16.7. Crisis management 16.8. Insurance 16.9. Risk assessment 16.10. Food and accomadation 16.11. Itinerary 16.12. Host country collaboration and university involvement 16.13. Registered field centre 16.14. Funding and budget 16.15. Environmental officer’s report 16.16. Photographic report 16.17. Video camera report 16.18. Trip camera 16.19. Logistical problems encountered 16.20. Distribution of full expedition reports 16.21. Other expedition outputs 16.22. Expedition website

17. Contacts 18. Referee19. Advisor 20. Acknowledgements 21. References 22. Appendixes 23. Photo gallery

Mountains of the Kora River Valley, Dzhungaria Range

6

1. ABSTRACT

This Newcastle University Expedition reviewed the conflict between man and snow leopard in the

region east of Tekeli in the Dzhungarian Alatau range, Kazakhstan. After the soviet state break-

up in 1991 snow leopards in Kazakhstan and in the other Asian republics were subjected to high

levels of persecution. There are thought to be between 180-200 snow leopards in Kazakhstan, of

which 37-40 individuals inhabit the Dzhungarian Mountains. No work has been done previously

to review the present snow leopard-human conflicts in this region, and this project looked to

update previous reports from Central Asia about predominant conflicts in these regions.

The expedition team worked with the Institute of Zoology in Kazakhstan and two of the

six person team were Kazakh students. Methods comparable to those used in previous studies

were used to map and rank the threats in the western area of the range, over an eight week

period. The expedition team lived in the mountains for periods of two-three weeks, carrying all

their food and equipment and using local vehicles, horses and trekking to move from pasture to

pasture. Semi-structured interviews, key informant interviews and prey counts were used to

assess snow leopard-human conflicts including poaching of snow leopard, poaching of leopard

wild prey, human disturbance and livestock overgrazing.

The results from the report support much previous work from Kazakhstan and other

areas in Central Asia, but serve as a useful update shedding light on an optimistic future for snow

leopard conservation while highlighting what the expedition team perceives to be the major

threats to snow leopards.

The threats to snow leopards, in order of relevance from most to least, are loss of prey

predominantly through hunting by local people (both legal and illegal), direct hunting of snow

leopard for pelt/medicine, disturbance by herders on the pastures, snow leopard habitat

fragmentation around the mountain bases, and least importantly overgrazing by domestic

livestock. Retaliatory kills by herders are not a threat in the region and on livestock were killed

by snow leopards. Levels of all hunting, legal and illegal, need to be reduced in the range until

wildlife populations have recovered significantly from the mid-1990’s over-hunting period.

Levels of rural corruption among many stakeholders were high around the mountain region, and

are thought to contribute negatively to wildlife conservation in the area. Ecotourism in the area,

that incorporates local people around the mountain region, is proposed as a solution to offer

local people’s incentives to lower hunting levels.

7

This report makes the following main recommendations:

¶ Strengthening law enforcement capacity

o Increasing the number of ecological rangers

o Increasing incentives of ecological rangers to prevent poaching

o Equipping the ecological rangers more sufficiently

¶ More effective communication between ranger and National Park administrative

regions

¶ The involvement of all stakeholders in wildlife conservation including military

officials and local herders

¶ Whistle blower policies to prevent illegal trade in all animals in the region

¶ More geographic consistency between present and proposed protected areas in

the region

¶ Accurate snow leopard monitoring to build on valuable information previously

collected in Kazakhstan

¶ Provision of local incentives (ecotourism and community based hunting

reserves) to reduce local hunting and local unemployment around the mountains

¶ Increased interest and technical assistance in Kazakhstan from conservation

International Non-Governmental Organizations

¶ More government fund for the Institute of Zoology

¶ Stronger cross border (Kazakhstan-China) legislation implementation

Further research could involve establishing an annual, standardized, snow leopard

survey in the range, or could compare these findings of threats to snow leopards to other regions

in Kazakhstan (eg. The Altai) or Central Asia.

This report has been replicated for all the expedition sponsors, put on the internet, and

distributed among contacts in the snow leopard conservation community.

The expedition team also spent some time exploring and photographing some of the

remoter valleys around the study pastures, and made a short video of the teams exploits. Links

were made between KIMEP University in Almaty, and Newcastle University, registered a

research centre with the Royal Geographical Society, and lectured about the Dzhungarian range

and snow leopard conservation at; the Royal Geographical Society, Newcastle University, Royal

Zoological Society for Scotland(Edinburgh Zoo), and Wilderness Lecturers (Bristol).

ʂʨʘʪʢʠʡ ʆʙʟʦʨ

ɼʘʥʥʘʷ ʵʢʩʧʝʜʠʮʠʷ ʦʨʛʘʥʠʟʦʚʘʥʥʘʷ ʅʴʶʢʘʩʣʩʢʠʤ ʋʥʠʚʝʨʩʠʪʝʪʦʤ

ʨʘʩʩʤʘʪʨʠʚʘʣʘ ʢʦʥʬʣʠʢʪ ʤʝʞʜʫ ʯʝʣʦʚʝʢʦʤ ʠ ʩʥʝʞʥʳʤ ʙʘʨʩʦʤ ʚ ʛʦʨʘʭ

ɼʞʫʥʛʘʨʩʢʠʭ ɸʣʘʪʘʫ, ʚʦʩʪʦʯʥʝʝ ʊʝʢʝʣʠ, ʂʘʟʘʭʩʪʘʥ. ʇʦʩʣʝ ʨʘʩʧʘʜʘ ʉʦʚʝʪʩʢʦʛʦ

ʉʦʶʟʘ ʚ 1991 ʛʦʜʫ, ʧʦʧʫʣʷʮʠʷ ʩʥʝʞʥʦʛʦ ʙʘʨʩʘ ʚ ʂʘʟʘʭʩʪʘʥʝ ʠ ʜʨʫʛʠʭ

ʎʝʥʪʨʘʣʴʥʦ-ɸʟʠʘʪʩʢʠʭ ʨʝʩʧʫʙʣʠʢʘʭ ʧʦʜʚʝʨʛʣʘʩʴ ʞʝʩʪʦʢʦʤʫ ʧʨʝʩʣʝʜʦʚʘʥʠʶ.

ʉʯʠʪʘʝʪʩʷ ʯʪʦ ʥʘ ʪʝʨʨʠʪʦʨʠʡ ʂʘʟʘʭʩʪʘʥʘ ʦʙʠʪʘʶʪ ʧʦʨʷʜʢʘ 180-200

ʩʥʝʞʥʳʭ ʙʘʨʩʦʚ. ʀʟ ʥʠʭ 37-40 ʦʩʦʙʝʡ ʚ ɼʞʫʥʛʘʨʩʢʠʭ ɸʣʘʪʘʫ. ʊʘʢ ʢʘʢ ʚ ʵʪʦʤ

ʨʝʛʠʦʥʝ ʝʱʝ ʥʝ ʧʨʦʚʦʜʠʣʦʩʴ ʥʠʢʘʢʦʡ ʨʘʙʦʪʳ ʧʦ ʠʟʫʯʝʥʠʶ ʢʦʥʬʣʠʢʪʘ ʤʝʞʜʫ

ʯʝʣʦʚʝʢʦʤ ʠ ʩʥʝʞʥʳʤ ʙʘʨʩʦʤ , ʮʝʣʴʶ ʵʪʦʛʦ ʧʨʦʝʢʪʘ ʙʳʣʦ ʦʙʥʦʚʠʪʴ

ʧʨʝʜʳʜʫʱʠʝ ʎʝʥʪʨʘʣʴʥʦ-ɸʟʠʘʪʩʢʠʝ ʜʦʢʣʘʜʳ ʦʙ ʦʩʥʦʚʥʳʭ ʢʦʥʬʣʠʢʪʘʭ ʚ

ʨʝʛʠʦʥʝ.

ʏʣʝʥʳ ʵʢʩʧʝʜʠʮʠʡ ʪʝʩʥʦ ʨʘʙʦʪʘʣʠ ʩ ʀʥʩʪʠʪʫʪʦʤ ɿʦʦʣʦʛʠʡ ʂʘʟʘʭʩʪʘʥʘ, ʘ

ʪʘʢʞʝ ʜʚʦʝ ʠʟ ʰʝʩʪʠ ʯʣʝʥʦʚ ʢʦʤʘʥʜʳ ʙʳʣʠ ʢʘʟʘʭʩʪʘʥʩʢʠʝ ʩʪʫʜʝʥʪʳ. ɺ

ʪʝʯʝʥʠʠ ʚʦʩʴʤʠ ʥʝʜʝʣʴ ʧʨʠʤʝʥʷʣʘʩʴ ʤʝʪʦʜʠʢʘ, ʩʦʧʦʩʪʘʚʠʤʘʷ ʩ ʧʨʠʤʝʥʝʥʥʳʤʠ

ʨʘʥʝʝ, ʜʣʷ ʦʙʦʟʥʘʯʝʥʠʷ ʠ ʢʣʘʩʩʠʬʠʢʘʮʠʠ ʫʛʨʦʟ ʚ ʟʘʧʘʜʥʦʡ ʯʘʩʪʠ ʭʨʝʙʪʦʚ. ʏʣʝʥʳ

ʵʢʩʧʝʜʠʮʠʡ ʦʩʪʘʥʘʚʣʠʚʘʣʠʩʴ ʚ ʛʦʨʘʭ ʥʘ 2-3 ʥʝʜʝʣʴʥʳʝ ʧʝʨʠʦʜʳ, ʟʘʭʚʘʪʠʚ ʩ

ʩʦʙʦʡ ʥʝʦʙʭʦʜʠʤʦʝ ʦʙʦʨʫʜʦʚʘʥʠʝ ʠ ʝʜʫ, ʠ ʧʝʨʝʜʚʠʛʘʣʠʩʴ ʦʪ ʦʜʥʦʛʦ ʧʘʩʪʙʠʱʘ ʥʘ

ʜʨʫʛʦʝ ʧʝʰʳʤʠ ʧʝʨʝʭʦʜʘʤʠ ʠ ʠʩʧʦʣʴʟʫʷ ʤʝʩʪʥʫʶ ʪʝʭʥʠʢʫ ʠ ʣʦʰʘʜʝʡ. ɼʣʷ

ʦʮʝʥʢʠ ʢʦʥʬʣʠʢʪʦʚ, ʪʘʢʠʭ ʢʘʢ ʙʨʘʢʦʥʴʝʨʩʪʚʘ ʥʘ ʙʘʨʩʘ, ʦʭʦʪʫ ʥʘ ʢʦʨʤʦʚʫʶ

ʙʘʟʫ ʭʠʱʥʠʢʘ, ʙʝʩʧʦʢʦʡʩʪʚʦ ʯʝʣʦʚʝʢʦʤ ʠ ʚʳʙʠʚʘʥʠʝ ʧʘʩʪʙʠʱ ʩʢʦʪʦʤ, ʙʳʣʠ

ʠʩʧʦʣʴʟʦʚʘʥʳ ʦʧʨʦʩʳ, ʚʠʟ-ʘ-ʚʠʟ ʠʥʪʝʨʚʴʶ ʘ ʪʘʢʞʝ ʧʦʜʩʯʝʪ ʢʦʨʤʦʚʦʡ ʙʘʟʳ

ʭʠʱʥʠʢʘ.

ʈʝʟʫʣʴʪʘʪʳ ʜʦʢʣʘʜʘ ʧʦʜʪʚʝʨʞʜʘʶʪ ʙʦʣʴʰʠʥʩʪʚʦ ʧʨʝʜʳʜʫʱʠʭ ʨʘʙʦʪ

ʩʜʝʣʘʥʥʳʭ ʚ ʂʘʟʘʭʩʪʘʥʝ ʠ ʜʨʫʛʠʭ ʎʝʥʪʨʘʣʴʥʦ-ɸʟʠʘʪʩʢʠʭ ʩʪʨʘʥʘʭ, ʥʦ ʦʥʠ

ʩʣʫʞʘʪ ʚʘʞʥʳʤ ʜʦʧʦʣʥʝʥʠʝʤ ʢ ʙʫʜʫʱʝʤʫ ʩʦʭʨʘʥʝʥʠʶ ʩʥʝʞʥʦʛʦ ʙʘʨʩʘ ʯʝʪʢʦ

ʫʢʘʟʳʚʘʷ ʥʘ ʛʣʘʚʥʳʝ ʫʛʨʦʟʳ ʜʣʷ ʩʥʝʞʥʦʛʦ ʙʘʨʩʘ.

ʋʛʨʦʟʦʡ ʩʥʝʞʥʦʤʫ ʙʘʨʩʫ ʷʚʣʷʶʪʩʷ, ʚ ʧʦʨʷʜʢʝ ʦʪ ʥʘʠʙʦʣʴʰʝʛʦ ʢ ʥʘʠʤʝʥʴʰʝʤʫ,

ʫʨʦʥ ʢʦʨʤʦʚʦʡ ʙʘʟʝ ʭʠʱʥʠʢʘ ʥʘʥʦʩʠʤʳʡ ʤʝʩʪʥʳʤʠ ʦʭʦʪʥʠʢʘʤʠ (ʢʘʢ

ʟʘʢʦʥʥʳʤʠ ʪʘʢ ʠ ʥʝʟʘʢʦʥʥʳʤʠ), ʦʭʦʪʘ ʥʘ ʩʘʤʦ ʞʠʚʦʪʥʦʝ ʨʘʜʠ ʰʢʫʨʳ,

ʙʝʩʧʦʢʦʡʩʪʚʦ ʩʢʦʪʦʚʦʜʘʤʠ ʥʘ ʧʘʩʪʙʠʱʘʭ, ʜʨʦʙʣʝʥʠʝ ʩʨʝʜʳ ʝʛʦ ʦʙʠʪʘʥʠʷ ʫ

ʧʦʜʥʦʞʴʷ ʛʦʨ, ʠ ʥʘʢʦʥʝʮ ʚʳʙʠʚʘʥʠʝ ʧʘʩʪʙʠʱ ʜʦʤʘʰʥʠʤ ʩʢʦʪʦʤ. ʊʘʢ ʢʘʢ ʥʝ

ʙʳʣʦ ʩʣʫʯʘʝʚ ʥʘʧʘʜʝʥʠʷ ʙʘʨʩʘ ʥʘ ʜʦʤʘʰʥʠʡ ʩʢʦʪ, ʥʝʪ ʫʛʨʦʟʳ ʢʘʨʘʪʝʣʴʥʦʡ

ʦʭʦʪʳ ʥʘ ʩʥʝʞʥʳʭ ʙʘʨʩʦʚ ʤʝʩʪʥʳʤʠ ʩʢʦʪʦʚʦʜʘʤʠ. ʅʝʦʙʭʦʜʠʤʦ ʩʥʠʟʠʪʴ

ʫʨʦʚʝʥʴ ʦʭʦʪʳ, ʣʝʛʘʣʴʥʦʡ ʠ ʥʝʣʝʛʘʣʴʥʦʡ, ʜʦ ʪʝʭ ʧʦʨ ʧʦʢʘ ʥʝ ʚʦʩʩʪʘʥʦʚʠʪʩʷ

ʧʦʧʫʣʷʮʠʷ ʜʠʢʠʭ ʞʠʚʦʪʥʳʭ ʧʦʩʪʨʘʜʘʚʰʘʷ ʦʪ ʯʨʝʟʤʝʨʥʦʛʦ ʠʩʩʪʨʝʙʣʝʥʠʷ ʚ

1990-ʭ ʛʦʜʘʭ. ʋʨʦʚʝʥʴ ʦʩʚʦʝʥʠʷ ʤʝʩʪʥʦʩʪʠ ʩʢʦʪʦʚʦʜʘʤʠ ʦʯʝʥʴ ʚʳʩʦʢ, ʯʪʦ

ʪʘʢʞʝ ʠʤʝʝʪ ʦʪʨʠʮʘʪʝʣʴʥʦʝ ʚʣʠʷʥʠʝ ʥʘ ʩʦʭʨʘʥʝʥʠʝ ʜʠʢʦʡ ʧʨʠʨʦʜʳ. ʂʘʢ

ʨʝʰʝʥʠʝ ʧʨʦʙʣʝʤʳ ʧʨʝʜʣʘʛʘʝʪʩʷ ʵʢʦʪʫʨʠʟʤ ʚ ʨʝʛʠʦʥʝ, ʢʦʪʦʨʳʡ ʦʙʝʩʧʝʯʠʪ

ʨʘʙʦʪʦʡ ʤʝʩʪʥʳʭ ʣʶʜʝʡ, ʩʥʠʞʘʷ ʫʨʦʚʝʥʴ ʦʭʦʪʳ ʤʝʩʪʥʳʤʠ ʣʶʜʤʠ.

ɻʣʘʚʥʳʝ ʨʝʢʦʤʝʥʜʘʮʠʠ ʜʦʢʣʘʜʘ:

¶ ʋʩʠʣʝʥʠʝ ʩʦʙʣʶʜʝʥʠʷ ʟʘʢʦʥʥʦʩʪʠ

1. ʋʚʝʣʠʯʠʪʴ ʯʠʩʣʦ ʝʛʝʨʝʡ

2. ʇʦʦʱʨʝʥʠʝ ʝʛʝʨʝʡ ʚ ʧʨʝʜʦʪʚʨʘʱʝʥʠʡ ʙʨʘʢʦʥʴʝʨʩʪʚʘ

3. ʋʢʦʤʧʣʝʢʪʦʚʘʪʴ ʝʛʝʨʝʡ ʜʦʩʪʘʪʦʯʥʳʤ ʦʙʦʨʫʜʦʚʘʥʠʝʤ

¶ ɹʦʣʝʝ ʵʬʬʝʢʪʠʚʥʦʝ ʩʦʪʨʫʜʥʠʯʝʩʪʚʦ ʤʝʞʜʫ ʝʛʝʨʷʤʠ ʠ ʘʢʠʤʘʪʘʤʠ

ʨʘʡʦʥʦʚ ʥʘ ʪʝʨʨʠʪʦʨʠʡ ʢʦʪʦʨʳʭ ʨʘʩʧʦʣʦʞʝʥ ʅʘʮʠʦʥʘʣʴʥʳʡ ʇʘʨʢ

¶ ʇʨʠʚʣʝʯʝʥʠʝ ʚʩʝʭ ʟʘʠʥʪʝʨʝʩʦʚʘʥʥʳʭ ʚ ʩʦʭʨʘʥʝʥʠʡ ʜʠʢʦʡ ʧʨʠʨʦʜʳ

ʩʪʦʨʦʥ, ʚʢʣʶʯʘʷ ʚʦʝʥʥʳʭ ʠ ʤʝʩʪʥʳʭ ʬʝʨʤʝʨʦʚ

¶ ʉʦʟʜʘʥʠʝ ʚ ʨʝʛʠʦʥʝ ʘʛʝʥʪʫʨʥʦʡ ʩʝʪʠ ʜʣʷ ʧʨʝʜʦʪʚʨʘʱʝʥʠʷ

ʥʝʟʘʢʦʥʥʦʡ ʪʦʨʛʦʚʣʠ ʜʠʢʠʤʠ ʞʠʚʦʪʥʳʤʠ

¶ ɹʦʣʴʰʝʝ ʛʝʦʛʨʘʬʠʯʝʩʢʦʝ ʩʦʦʪʚʝʪʩʚʠʝ ʩʫʱʝʩʪʚʫʶʱʠʭ ʠ ʙʫʜʫʱʠʭ

ʦʭʨʘʥʷʝʤʳʭ ʟʦʥ ʚ ʨʝʛʠʦʥʝ

¶ ʊʱʘʪʝʣʴʥʳʡ ʤʦʥʠʪʦʨʠʥʛ ʩʥʝʞʥʦʛʦ ʙʘʨʩʘ ʧʦʩʪʨʦʝʥʥʳʡ ʥʘ

ʧʨʝʜʳʜʫʱʠʭ ʮʝʥʥʳʭ ʩʚʝʜʝʥʠʷʭ ʩʦʙʨʘʥʥʳʭ ʚ ʂʘʟʘʭʩʪʘʥʝ.

¶ ʇʦʜʜʝʨʞʢʘ ʤʝʩʪʥʳʭ ʠʥʠʮʠʘʪʠʚ (ʵʢʦʪʫʨʠʟʤʘ ʠ ʧʨʦʤʳʩʣʦʚʳʭ

ʦʭʦʪʭʦʟʷʡʩʪʚ) ʩʦʜʝʡʩʪʚʫʶʱʠʭ ʩʥʠʞʝʥʠʶ ʫʨʦʚʥʷ ʦʭʦʪʳ ʠ

ʙʝʟʨʘʙʦʪʠʮʳ

¶ ʇʦʚʳʰʝʥʠʝ ʠʥʪʝʨʝʩʘ ʠ ʪʝʭʥʠʯʝʩʢʦʡ ʧʦʜʜʝʨʞʢʠ ʩʦ ʩʪʦʨʦʥʳ

ʤʝʞʜʫʥʘʨʦʜʥʳʭ ʥʝʧʨʘʚʠʪʝʣʴʩʪʚʝʥʥʳʭ ʧʨʠʨʦʜʦʦʭʨʘʥʥʳʭ

ʦʨʛʘʥʠʟʘʮʠʠ

¶ ɹʦʣʴʰʝʝ ʬʠʥʘʥʩʠʨʦʚʘʥʠʝ ʀʥʩʪʠʪʫʪʘ ɿʦʦʣʦʛʠʠ ʩʦ ʩʪʦʨʦʥʳ

ʛʦʩʫʜʘʨʩʪʚʘ

¶ ʋʩʠʣʝʥʠʝ ʤʝʞʛʦʩʫʜʘʨʩʪʚʝʥʥʦʛʦ(ʂʘʟʘʭʩʢʦ-ʂʠʪʘʡʩʢʦʛʦ)

ʩʦʪʨʫʜʥʠʯʝʩʪʚʘ ʥʘ ʟʘʢʦʥʦʜʘʪʝʣʴʥʦʤ ʫʨʦʚʥʝ

ɼʘʣʴʥʝʡʰʠʝ ʠʩʩʣʝʜʦʚʘʥʠʷ ʤʦʛʫʪ ʚʢʣʶʯʘʪʴ ʚ ʩʝʙʷ ʝʞʝʛʦʜʥʳʝ,

ʩʪʘʥʜʘʨʪʠʟʦʚʘʥʥʳʝ ʦʪʩʣʝʞʢʫ ʩʥʝʞʥʳʭ ʙʘʨʩʦʚ ʚ ʨʝʛʠʦʥʝ, ʠ ʩʨʘʚʥʝʥʠʝ ʵʪʠʭ

ʜʘʥʥʳʭ ʩʦ ʩʚʝʜʝʥʠʷʤʠ ʠʟ ʜʨʫʛʠʭ ʨʝʛʠʦʥʦʚ ʂʘʟʘʭʩʪʘʥʘ (ʪ.ʢ. ɸʣʪʘʡ) ʠʣʠ

ʎʝʥʪʨʘʣʴʥʦʡ ɸʟʠʠ.

ʕʪʦʪ ʜʦʢʣʘʜ ʙʳʣ ʨʘʟʦʩʣʘʥ ʚʩʝʤ ʩʧʦʥʩʦʨʘʤ ʵʢʩʧʝʜʠʮʠʡ, ʚʳʚʝʰʝʥ ʚ ʀʥʪʝʨʥʝʪʝ

ʠ ʦʪʧʨʘʚʣʝʥ ʚʩʝʤ ʢʪʦ ʩʚʷʟʘʥ ʩ ʦʭʨʘʥʦʡ ʩʥʝʞʥʦʛʦ ʙʘʨʩʘ.

ʂʦʤʘʥʜʘ ʵʢʩʧʝʜʠʮʠʡ ʪʘʢʞʝ ʧʨʦʚʝʣʘ ʦʙʩʣʝʜʦʚʘʥʠʝ ʠ ʬʦʪʦʩʲʝʤʢʫ ʦʪʜʘʣʝʥʥʳʭ

ʜʦʣʠʥ ʨʝʢ ʠ ʩʜʝʣʘʣʘ ʚʠʜʝʦʩʲʝʤʢʫ ʢʦʤʘʥʜʥʳʭ ʧʦʭʦʜʦʚ. ɹʳʣʘ ʫʩʪʘʥʦʚʣʝʥʘ

ʥʝʧʦʩʨʝʜʩʪʚʝʥʥʘʷ ʩʚʷʟʴ ʤʝʞʜʫ ɸʣʤʘʪʠʥʩʢʠʤ ʂʀʄɽʇʦʤ ʠ ʋʥʠʚʝʨʩʠʪʝʪʦʤ

ʛʦʨʦʜʘ ʅʴʶʢʘʩʣ, ʙʳʣ ʟʘʨʝʛʠʩʪʨʠʨʦʚʘʥ ʠʩʩʣʝʜʦʚʘʪʝʣʴʩʢʠʡ ʮʝʥʪʨ ʚ

ʂʦʨʦʣʝʚʩʢʦʤ ɻʝʦʛʨʘʬʠʯʝʩʢʦʤ ʆʙʱʝʩʪʚʝ. ɹʳʣʠ ʧʨʦʚʝʜʝʥʳ ʣʝʢʮʠʠ ʦ

ɼʞʫʥʛʘʨʩʢʠʭ ɸʣʘʪʘʫ ʠ ʦʙ ʦʭʨʘʥʝ ʩʥʝʞʥʳʭ ʙʘʨʩʦʚ ʚ: ʂʦʨʦʣʝʚʩʢʦʤ

ɻʝʦʛʨʘʬʠʯʝʩʢʦʤ ʆʙʱʝʩʪʚʝ, ʋʥʠʚʝʨʩʠʪʝʪʝ ʅʴʶʢʘʩʣʘ, ʂʦʨʦʣʝʚʩʢʦʤ

ɿʦʦʣʦʛʠʯʝʩʢʦʤ ʆʙʱʝʩʪʚʝ ʐʦʪʣʘʥʜʠʠ (ʏʝʩʪʝʨʩʢʠʡ ɿʦʦʧʘʨʢ), ʃʝʢʮʠʠʡ ʦ ɼʠʢʦʡ

ʇʨʠʨʦʜʝ (ɹʨʠʩʪʦʣʴ)

ʅʘʫʯʥʦʝ ɿʘʢʣʶʯʝʥʠʝɹʳʣʠ ʧʦʜʪʚʝʨʞʜʝʥʳ ʧʨʝʜʳʜʫʱʠʝ ʜʦʢʣʘʜʳ ʧʦʜʯʝʨʢʠʚʘʚʰʠʝ ʩʝʨʴʝʟʥʳʝ

ʧʦʩʣʝʜʩʪʚʠʷ ʨʘʩʧʘʜʘ ʉʦʚʝʪʩʢʦʛʦ ʉʦʶʟʘ ʥʘ ʦʭʨʘʥʫ ʜʠʢʦʡ ʧʨʠʨʦʜʳ. ʂʦʨʝʥʥʳʤʠ

ʧʨʠʯʠʥʘʤʠ ʜʘʥʥʳʭ ʢʦʥʬʣʠʢʪʦʚ ʙʳʣʠ ʙʝʟʨʘʙʦʪʠʮʘ ʠʟ-ʟʘ ʦʪʤʝʥʳ ʛʦʩʟʘʨʧʣʘʪ ʠ

ʨʘʩʧʘʜʘ ʢʦʣʣʝʢʪʠʚʥʳʭ ʭʦʟʷʡʩʪʚ ʠ ʢʦʦʧʝʨʘʪʠʚʦʚ ʥʘ ʩʝʣʝ, ʩʦʧʨʦʚʘʞʜʘʝʤʘʷ ʩ

ʨʘʟʚʘʣʦʤ ʛʦʩʩʠʩʪʝʤʳ ʢʦʥʪʨʦʣʷ ʟʘ ʯʝʨʥʳʤ ʨʳʥʢʦʤ ʠ ʧʦʚʩʝʤʝʩʪʥʦʡ ʢʦʨʨʫʧʮʠʝʡ.

ʇʦʚʣʠʷʣʠ ʪʘʢʞʝ ʦʪʢʨʳʪʠʝ ʤʝʞʜʫʥʘʨʦʜʥʳʭ ʛʨʘʥʠʮ ʠ ʚʦʟʨʦʩʰʠʡ ʩʧʨʦʩ ʚ

ʢʠʪʘʡʩʢʦʡ ʤʝʜʠʮʠʥʝ. ʕʪʦ ʠʩʩʣʝʜʦʚʘʥʠʝ ʧʨʦʚʝʜʝʥʥʦʝ ʚ 2004 ʛʦʜʫ, 13 ʣʝʪ ʧʦʩʣʝ

ʨʘʩʧʘʜʘ ʉʦʶʟʘ, ʫʢʘʟʳʚʘʝʪ ʥʘ ʧʦʨʝʜʝʚʰʫʶ ʧʦʧʫʣʷʮʠʶ ʩʥʝʞʥʦʛʦ ʙʘʨʩʘ ʚ

ɼʞʫʥʛʘʨʩʢʠʭ ɸʣʘʪʘʫ, ʢʦʪʦʨʘʷ ʚʦʟʤʦʞʥʦ ʧʦʜʘʝʪ ʧʨʠʟʥʘʢʠ ʚʦʩʪʘʥʦʚʣʝʥʠʷ.

ɼʘʥʥʘʷ ʨʘʙʦʪʘ ʧʦʜʪʚʝʨʞʜʘʝʪ ʜʦʢʣʘʜʳ ʠʟ ʎʝʥʪʨʘʣʴʥʦ-ɸʟʠʘʪʩʢʠʭ ʩʪʨʘʥ ʯʪʦ

ʛʣʘʚʥʦʡ ʫʛʨʦʟʦʡ ʷʚʣʷʝʪʩʷ ʥʝ ʢʦʥʬʣʠʢʪ ʬʝʨʤʝʨʘ ʠ ʙʘʨʩʘ, ʘ ʦʭʦʪʘ ʥʘ ʙʘʨʩʘ ʠ ʥʘ

ʢʦʨʤʦʚʫʶ ʙʘʟʫ ʭʠʱʥʠʢʘ (ʄʘʢʢʘʨʪʠ ʠ ʐʘʧʨʦʥ 2003). ʄʝʩʪʥʳʝ ʩʢʦʪʦʚʦʜʳ ʥʝ

ʫʢʘʟʳʚʘʣʠʩʴ ʢʘʢ ʛʣʘʚʥʝʡʰʠʝ ʫʯʘʩʪʥʠʢʠ ʢʦʥʬʣʠʢʪʘ, ʦʜʥʘʢʦ ʥʘʨʫʰʝʥʠʝ

ʵʢʦʙʘʣʘʥʩʘ ʥʘ ʧʘʩʪʙʠʱʘʭ ʥʝʩʦʤʥʝʥʥʦ ʠʤʝʝʪ ʛʥʝʪʫʱʝʝ ʚʣʠʷʥʠʝ ʥʘ ʩʥʝʞʥʳʭ

ʙʘʨʩʦʚ. ʆʪʤʝʯʝʥʦ ʧʦʣʦʞʠʪʝʣʴʥʦʝ ʦʪʥʦʰʝʥʠʝ ʤʝʩʪʥʳʭ ʩʢʦʪʦʚʦʜʦʚ ʢ

ʟʘʧʦʚʝʜʥʳʤ ʟʦʥʘʤ ʠ ʞʠʚʦʪʥʳʤ.

ɼʦ ʩʠʭ ʧʦʨ ʦʛʨʦʤʥʘʷ ʨʘʙʦʪʘ ʩʜʝʣʘʥʥʘʷ ʧʨʘʚʣʝʥʠʝʤ ʅʘʮʇʘʨʢʘ, ʀʥʩʪʠʪʫʪʦʤ

ɿʦʦʣʦʛʠʠ ʠ ʥʝʧʦʩʨʝʜʩʪʚʝʥʥʦ ʝʛʝʨʷʤʠ ʩʜʝʨʞʠʚʘʣʘ ʢʦʥʬʣʠʢʪʳ. ʆʜʥʦʢʘ ʟʘʱʠʪʘ

ɼʞʫʥʛʘʨʩʢʠʭ ɸʣʘʪʘʫ ʜʘʣʝʢʘ ʦʪ ʩʦʚʝʨʰʝʥʥʦʛʦ ʠ ʪʨʝʙʫʝʪ ʙʦʣʴʰʝʛʦ ʧʨʠʚʣʝʯʝʥʠʷ

ʝʛʝʨʝʡ ʠ ʙʦʣʝʝ ʵʬʬʝʢʪʠʚʥʳʭ ʤʝʨ ʚ ʜʘʥʥʦʤ ʥʘʧʨʘʚʣʝʥʠʡ. ʅʝʚʦʟʤʦʞʥʦ

ʦʪʩʣʝʞʠʚʘʪʴ ʪʘʢʫʶ ʦʙʰʠʨʥʫʶ ʪʝʨʨʠʪʦʨʠʶ, ʧʦʵʪʦʤʫ ʥʝʦʙʭʦʜʠʤʦ

ʧʨʝʜʣʦʞʠʪʴ ʘʣʪʝʨʥʘʪʠʚʥʳʡ ʟʘʨʦʙʦʪʦʢ ʪʝʤ ʢʪʦ ʟʘʥʠʤʘʝʪʩʷ ʦʭʦʪʦʡ,

ʥʘʧʨʠʤʝʨ ʵʢʦʪʫʨʠʟʤ, ʫʤʝʥʴʰʘʷ ʤʘʩʰʪʘʙʳ ʙʨʘʢʦʥʴʝʨʩʪʚʘ, ʠ ʜʝʣʘʷ ʩʘʤʫ

ʣʝʛʘʣʴʥʫʶ ʦʭʦʪʫ ʙʦʣʝʝ ʧʨʦʟʨʘʯʥʦʡ ʠ ʧʨʠʙʳʣʴʥʦʡ.

ɽʩʪʴ ʚʦʟʤʦʞʥʦʩʪʴ ʜʘʣʥʝʡʰʠʭ ʠʩʩʣʝʜʦʚʘʥʠʠ ʧʦ ʫʯʝʪʫ ʩʥʝʞʥʳʭ ʙʘʨʩʦʚ, ʪʘʢʘʷ

ʨʘʙʦʪʘ ʧʨʦʚʦʜʠʪʩʷ ʩʝʡʯʘʩ ʀʥʩʪʠʪʫʪʦʤ ɿʦʦʣʦʛʠʠ, ʥʦ ʦʥʘ ʙʝʟʥʘʜʝʞʥʦ

ʦʙʨʝʟʘʥʘ ʦʪ ʬʠʥʘʥʩʠʨʦʚʘʥʠʷ. ʆʜʥʘʢʦ ʥʘʠʚʘʞʥʝʡʰʠʤ ʷʚʣʷʝʪʩʷ ʧʨʠʥʷʪʠʝ ʚʦ

ʚʥʠʤʘʥʠʝ ʨʝʢʦʤʝʥʜʘʮʠʠ ʧʦ ʨʝʰʝʥʠʶ ʢʦʥʬʣʠʢʪʘ (ʚ ʩʘʤʦʝ ʙʣʠʞʘʡʰʝʝ ʚʨʝʤʷ) ʠ

ʫʙʝʜʠʪʝʣʴʥʦ ʧʨʦʩʠʤ ʥʝʧʨʘʚʠʪʝʣʴʩʪʚʝʥʥʳʝ ʦʨʛʘʥʠʟʘʮʠʠ ʧʦ ʦʭʨʘʥʝ ʧʨʠʨʦʜʳ

ʪʝʩʥʦ ʩʦʪʨʫʜʥʠʯʘʪʴ ʩ ʢʘʟʘʭʩʪʘʥʩʢʠʤʠ ʚʣʘʩʪʷʤʠ ʚ ʜʘʥʥʦʡ ʨʘʙʦʪʝ.

“ʂʘʟʘʭʩʪʘʥʩʢʠʡ ʥʘʨʦʜ ʠʤʝʶʪ ʫʥʠʢʘʣʴʥʫʶ ʚʦʟʤʦʞʥʦʩʪʴ ʧʦʢʘʟʘʪʴ ʤʠʨʫ ʩʚʦʝ

ʧʦʢʣʦʥʝʥʠʝ ʧʨʝʢʨʘʩʥʝʡʰʝʤʫ ʩʠʤʚʦʣʫ ʩʚʦʝʡ ʟʝʤʣʠ ʧʦʷʚʠʚʰʝʤʩʷ ʝʱʝ ʚ ʜʨʝʚʥʝʤ

ʠʩʩʢʫʩʪʚʝ ʠ ʧʝʪʨʦʛʣʠʬʘʭ; ʩʥʝʞʥʦʛʦ ʙʘʨʩʘ ʊʷʥʴ-ʐʘʥʩʢʠʭ ʛʦʨ.” ʂʦʰʢʘʨʝʚ 2000

8

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 Objectives:

¶ Identify major threats to snow leopard in the region ¶ Record the frequency of other carnivore-livestock interactions in this region ¶ Quantify the cost of this co-existence for man (financial) and snow leopard (survival) ¶ Map and rank threats to snow leopard ¶ Identify root causes of conflict ¶ Review remedial measures to reduce conflict ¶ Assess attitudes toward wildlife ¶ Compare the results to previous research with the same methods out-with Kazakhstan

2.2 Snow leopards: An introduction

The snow leopard (Uncia uncia), or Irbis, has been legally protected in the Republic of Kazakhstan, formerly the USSR, since 1972, and is listed in the Red Book of Kazakhstan (1978). It is one of the most threatened big cats in the world as categorized on the 2000 IUCN Red List and is on CITES Appendix I .This was signed by Kazakhstan in1993. Approximately 4500-7500 snow leopards survive in the wilderness of Central Asia's mountains and the Himalayas (Koshkarev 2000).

2.2.1 Snow leopards in Kazakhstan

In Kazakhstan snow leopards are to be found in the most extreme eastern, southeastern and southern mountainous regions, including the Altai, Saur and Tarbagatai, Dzhungarian, Alatau, Northern and Western Tian-Shan ranges (Ahmad and Jackson 1995). The protection of the snow leopard in Kazakhstan is under the Law on Wildlife Protection of January 1993 and this prohibits hunting, possession and sale of the species body parts (for example the pelt of bones). The maximum fine for the illegal hunting of snow leopards in Kazakhstan is KZT150 000 (USD1000) (Yuchenkov 2000).

Despite nine protected areas in Kazakhstan, snow leopards are only regularly reported from the Aksu-Dzhabagly and Almaty (formerlyAlma-Atinsky) reserves, although numbers are low in all areas. From the proceedings of the 8th International Snow Leopard Symposium, the total population of snow leopards in Kazakhstan was estimated at 180 (Ahmad and Jackson 1995). In the Dzhungarian Alatau the population of snow leopard’s current status is unclear and there are numerous reports of poaching by the shepherds and other peoples of the region (Ahmad and Jackson 1995). The Dxhungarian Alatau is an Alpine like range, 470km long, running west-east, which rises out of the Kazakh Steppe reaching heights of 4600m.

9

2.3 Threats to Snow Leopards

Direct killings of snow leopards and loss of their natural prey base (leading to starvation) are considered to be the most significant threats to the long-term survival of the species according to work by McCarthy and Chapron (2003). This work highlighted that the relative importance of these two threats differed according to the geographical region. Not exclusive, a divide was defined between

¶ The Himalayan region - Bhutan, India, Nepal, Karakoram, Hindu Kush, and the Tibetan and other parts of southern China. Killings of snow leopards in retribution for livestock depredation is the major threat in this region.

¶ The Central Asian region - Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and the Xinjiang Autonomous Region of China (northern range of the species) Poaching of snow leopards for trade is the main threat in this region.

The latter includes the Chinese Altai Mountains and Tien Shan Mountains (Xinjiang Autonomous Province), Mongolia and the Russian Federation. The main threats and relevant work are discussed below, and further reference in given in this section.

2.3.1 A Conflict with herders

In Zaskar (Zanskar), in northern India between 1996 and 2002 Spearing (2002) found sixteen snow leopards that had been killed by herders. These were retaliatory killings after snow leopards had killed herder’s livestock. This figure includes eight snow leopards which were killed in one village alone.

Snow leopards depredate mainly sheep and goats, but they will also take cattle, horses and donkeys (Jackson 1995). The percentage of overall economic loss (loss of income) of livestock can appear minimal, but in many cases a house-hold or even small community can be devastated economically. That is, the predation is often not spread equally among livestock owners, and some individuals or villages may suffer great losses. Although predation can never be completely eliminated, “one of the greatest challenges in the conservation of the snow leopard is to mitigate the conflict caused by predators” (Jackson 1995).

Killings of snow leopards in response to, or in prevention of, livestock losses were reported as a prime danger to the species and most herders interviewed in Zaskar felt that snow leopards should be eradicated, because they were nuisance animals (Spearing, 2002). Similar numbers of snow leopards are killed each year in Pakistan's Northern Areas (especially in Baltistan and Hunza), in parts of Nepal's remote west and in certain areas on the Tibetan Plateau (R. Jackson 2003, in litt). The tendency of snow leopards to remain at the killing site to consume their prey increases their vulnerability to retaliatory killings by herders.

Although reported losses of domestic stock to wolves are sometimes higher than those attributed to snow leopards, wolves are not as keenly hunted by herders, as they more frequently take smaller livestock, such as sheep and goats (McCarthy, 1999; Jackson 2003, in litt).Moreover, herders in Afghanistan reported that Snow Leopards were more likely than wolves to enter a corral and, therefore, to do more damage to livestock (Anon., 2003a).

10

2.3.2 B Loss of Natural Prey base:

2.3.2.1 Disturbance and Overgrazing

Disturbance is the effect that people have on wild animals, and has been in the past associated with reduction in breeding success due to reduced grazing or higher levels of alertness. Worse still is complete exclusion from particular habitats. If livestock herders are using vast stretches of hillside it is likely that snow leopard prey will not utilize these areas, and this effectively reduces their habitat. The extent of this exclusion therefore depends on livestock regimes, and how many herders or other people are in the area.

Overgrazing refers to reduction in quality of a pasture system due to high grazing pressure by domestic livestock. Like disturbance above (though through different mechanisms) it reduces breeding, in this case due to reduced nutrition(sward heights and species composition), which is especially damaging during the winter periods, when snow leopard prey species would drop onto pastures that are utilized by domestic livestock during the summer period. Therefore it temporally and spatially effects snow leopard prey. It is exceptionally hard to measure the actualeffect, but was done so for example by Mishra (2004) who reviewed competition between domestic livestock and wild bharal in the trans-Himalaya. Bharal sharing pastures with domestic livestock were shown to have poorer breeding performance and had a lower overall density. This was thought to be due to considerable diet overlap between bharal and domestic livestock.

Both disturbance and overgrazing can therefore effect the density of herbivores, and so will have an indirect effect on snow leopard populations.

2.3.2.2 Loss of natural prey base due to hunting

Wild ungulates, such as argali, ibex or blue sheep, are adversely affected by over-grazing of land through increased competition with domestic livestock in parts of the snow leopard’s range as shown above. However, in Central Asia natural prey are known to be reduced through over-hunting. This is known to have occurred especially in Central Asia after the break up of the Soviet Union, and is thought to have occurred in the Dzhungarian range ( Koshkarev 2000a). This however has not been as well documented as other threats associated with snow leopards.

Whatever the reasons for a reduction in snow leopard prey, the effects may be indirect as well as direct. A shortage of natural prey can lead to increased predation on domestic livestock, which in turn may provoke herders to kill snow leopards (McCarthy and Chapron, 2003). For this reason, destruction of the habitat of snow leopard prey species such as overgrazing, or directly due to hunting, will affect the predator more seriously than direct impacts on its own habitat.

2.3.3 C Habitat loss, fragmentation and geographical range

Habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation affect snow leopards, but owing to the remoteness and inaccessibility of the preferred habitat, such impacts on snow leopards have been relatively limited until recently. Habitat alterations occur as a result of human encroachment into the species’ range, for example for living space, resource extraction, road building, or new grazing grounds (so is therefore linked to the section above on overgrazing and disturbance). Habitat loss here will be considered as new buildings or roads and other ‘unnatural’ human activities. The geographical range of snow leopards refers to its habitat range, which in more recent times is becoming constricted by a variety of human activities. In this project the geographical size and position of the range is also considered.

11

D Non-selective killing: traps and poison Snow leopards are killed accidentally in traps that target other animals or through

poisoned bait. For example, in Krasnoyarsk Krai in the Russian Federation, it is estimated that up to six snow leopards die in musk deer traps each year and scientists of the Sayan-Syushinski Nature Reserve in the Altai Republic of the Russian Federation estimate that up to three Snow Leopards a year are accidentally caught in traps set out for musk deer and lynx (Poyarkov, 2002). In the Russian Federation and Kyrgyzstan, the wide and unregulated use of poison to control predators, for example, wolves, also threatens snow leopards (Poyarkov, 2002).

E Trapping and killing for trade Snow leopards are killed for their bones which are used in Chinese medicine, and their

pelt which is highly valued for decoration. Even where the primary motive for killing a snow leopard has not been trade, its body parts may still be sold. It is therefore important to understand the circumstances leading to killings where commercial gain is not the prime motive, as have been described in preceding sections, as sometimes being significant contextual and contributory factors linked to trade in snow leopards and their body parts. For more on trade in snow leopard parts the reader is referred to Theile (2003).

2.4 Cost of Predation- Comparative Reports of Retaliatory Kills and Livestock Losses

In Tsarap valley Zanskar the average loss per household in 2000-01 was 1.42 domestic animals (USD54) (Spearing 2002). The average household income was USD378. McCarthy (1999) studied four provinces in Mongolia (Govï-Altay, Hovd, Bayan-Ölgiy and Uvs) and found that snow leopard predation resulted in on average USD47 per household, 6-10% of the annual income of a herder family (USD470-783). 70% of the livestock losses (numbers killed) were large animals (horses or yak).

In Nepal Oli et al (1994) found that snow leopard predation caused a 20% loss of the average annual income for a herder family (USD252) and this was 2.6 % of all animal stock held by 102 households. Jackson and Wangchuk, (2001) found in India-Hemis National Park (in Jammu and Kashmir, northern India) that snow leopards accounted for 55% of all predation incidents and wolves for 31%. Overall economic losses were 1-15 % or more of domestic stock to predators. Depending on the region and livestock composition there will be a variation in which livestock are killed. In this case sheep and goats made up 75% of losses (numbers of livestock), yaks/cattle 13% and horses 8%. These averages disguise the fact that in general predation cases are not evenly distributed across a farming ‘community’. In this case 3 of 102 households concurred 54% of the losses. The cost of livestock losses is especially high where so-called “surplus killings” occur, when snow leopards rampage through a corral, killing more than they need to eat (Theile 2003).

2.5 Factors affecting predation

1./ Poor security. In most cases of “surplus killings”, snow leopards were reported to have broken into night-time enclosures that were not properly constructed. Nearly 50% of all livestock reported lost in Hemis National Park, was taken by snow leopards entering poorly constructed corrals (Jackson and Wangchuk, 2001, Jackson 1999).

2./ Livestock husbandry. Interviews conducted by McCarthy (1999) among 105 herders in four provinces in Mongolia (Gobi-Altay, Hovd, Uvs and Bayan-Ölgiy) concluded that, on average, 57 head of livestock a year were lost to Snow Leopards and 70% of the losses comprised large animals, such as horses or yaks. A study in Mongolia found that Snow Leopards were more

12

likely to kill large livestock, such as horses, yaks or camels, than smaller domestic animals, because these larger animals are often allowed to roam freely and generally are less well-tended than smaller stock (Sumiya and Buyantsog, 2002).

3./ Season. Sumiya and Buyantsog (2002) found that livestock losses in Uvs province, Mongolia, were more likely in winter consisting of 75% of the losses. Oli (1991) reported that snow leopard predation in the Annapurna Conservation Area of Nepal was higher in winter and that this was probably partly owing to the unavailability of marmots during their winter hibernation. Moreover, in winter and early spring snow leopards come down to lower elevations, so are closer to settlements and at a time when livestock is in poor condition (and less able to resist attacks) owing to lack of forage and exposure to the elements (R. Jackson 2003 in litt.).

2.6 Local perception of snow leopards

Obviously people’s perceptions themselves cannot threaten snow leopard survival in particular areas, but people’s behavior will be affected by underlying perceptions. Therefore the study of local attitudes is essential to understand why and how local people are acting towards snow leopards and indeed prey animals. These local attitudes are a major part of any such study and have been used previously in snow leopard studies to learn more about human-wildlife interactions for both conservation reasons, and for finding more about people’s livelihoods (eg. Oli 1994, Jackson 1999) Local perceptions of predators will also effect how tolerant local people are of suffering livestock losses. Tolerance varies with education and experience and is discussed later in the report.

2.7 Central Asian republics and the Russian Federation: Snow leopards in Kazakhstan since Independence

The prime motive for killing Snow Leopards in the Russian Federation and Central Asia seems to be for financial gain (Koshkarev and Vyrypaev, 2000; Dexel, 2002; Poyarkov, 2002). In December 1991 Kazakhstan split off from the USSR to form an independent state. This presented threats to the snow leopards due to economic pressures and uncertainty over environmental legislation (Braden 1994). The independence caused problems from new ‘international’ borders, such as poaching of prey species, illegal taking of snow leopard skins for foreign markets (Braden 1994). With the break up of the Soviet Union the poaching of snow leopard grew by a factor of 3-4 (Koshkarev 2000). A major factor in Kazakhstan is thought to be the failure to pay salaries and wages from 1992-1993 in rural areas, combined with a dramatic increase in the demand for raw materials for Chinese medicine (Koshkarev 2000). Not only the hunting of snow leopards themselves, but also poaching of wild ungulates and other small game for subsistence also increased dramatically, leading to a decline in the snow leopard’s natural prey base (Koshkarev and Vyrypaev, 2000).

2.7.1 Kazakhstan

In Kazakhstan the population of snow leopards is thought to be in decline as a result of poaching and a decline in the animal’s prey base. Wild prey compete with domestic animals for grazing and are themselves poached and affected by other forms of human disturbance (E. Bykova, B. Grebot and E. Kreuzberg-Mukhina, Institute of Zoology, Uzbekistan and London Imperial College, in litt., 2002). The major threats to the species were identified by Ahmad and Jackson (1995) to involve poaching for sale of fur, and habitat loss from increasing human activity within its mountain ranges. In neighboring Kyrgyz the major pressure on snow leopards

13

has been found to be a demand for furs for coats. Also the bones are highly revered in Chinese medicine and act as a substitute for tiger bones.

Domestic livestock rarely come into contact with snow leopards in Kazakhstan and hence killings resulting from conflict with herders do not pose a significant threat to the species in this country (Yamaguchi, 2001). However, it is known that in certain cases snow leopards attack domestic sheep and feed on the carcasses of carrion (Annenkov 1990).

Snow leopard’s skins were advertised for sale in local newspapers in the mid 1990’s. In the late 1990’s prices offered on the black market in Kazakhstan seemed to increase and were reported to have been up to USD10 000 (Yamaguchi, 2001). Chestin (1998) reported that approximately 10 Snow Leopard skins a year were sold in the mid-1990s in the republic’s capital Almaty, each skin for between USD3000 and USD7000, depending on the size, quality and customer. The majority of the buyers were foreigners such as employees of foreign firms located in the country.

2.7.2 Snow Leopards in the Dzhungarian Alatau

Annenkov (1990) estimated that in 1990 the average density in the Dzhungarian range was 0.83 individuals/100km2. As opposed to snow leopards occupying regions of the Tien Shan range, those in the Dzhungarian range inhabit sites at lower altitudes. In a majority of cases Annenkov (1990) observed the predators between 1000m-2500m.

2.7.3 Research in Kazakhstan

Limited work has been carried out by the Institute of Zoology on the snow leopard of the Dzhungarian range. This work has focused on prey species including ibex, mountain sheep, and marmots. Recently research has been further restricted by economic inertia due to declining budgets allocated to the protection of nature and scientific research (Ahmad and Jackson 1995).

2.7.4 Newcastle Universities Initiative

A report from a Royal Geographical Society sponsored expedition (Ref :4096) by Ashley Spearing was reviewed and provided ideas for the current study to be carried out. Ashley Spearing worked as our advisor, providing information about research techniques. The team also had contact and advice from the International Snow Leopard Trust and the Snow Leopard Conservancy. The teams aim therefore was to review conflict between man and snow leopard in the region east of Tekeli in the Dzhungarian Alatau range.

14

2.8 Regional Geography

2.8.1 Study area

The study area, east of Taldy-Kurgan is known as the ‘Taldy-Kurgan Region’. This Region (administrative) lies in the south-east of Kazakhstan, and its western and northern part consists of a plain which slopes slightly down towards the lower Lake Balkhash (Figure 1). This plain is covered in sand ripples and hills although spurs from the Dzhungarian Alatau mountains stretch into the sand in the south and east of the region. On the plain the climate is classified as ‘severe continental’ with average temperatures between -12C to-16C in January, and around 22°C in July. The plain receives around 100-250mm of rain a year. In sandy areas the plain lacks rivers and stream. The most significant rivers, for example the Karatal, Aksu, Lepsy and Ayagus, run into Lake Balkhash. There are many lakes (mostly saline) in the north of this region, and the largest are Balkhash, Alakol and Sasykol. In the foothills of the Dzhungarian there are mineral springs. Tracks of sand fixed with vegetation dominate the plain (worm wood, desert bushes and saksaul), although there are also wet and dry saline lands. The swampy shores of the lakes and river banks are covered in dense stands of reeds and riverside forests.

2.8.2 Dzhungaria Mountains

This Alpine like- range measures 450km from west to east, and the highest peak measures 4600m. It consists of low narrow valley plains with sparse woodland that ascend to mountain ranges.In the foothills and valleys of the Dzhungaria the climate is more moderate, and temperatures in January range between -6C and -8C, while sometimes thaws occur. The rainfall ranges between 450 and 500mm a year. Most of the precipitation falls during the spring and summer periods. Stable snow sets in the foothills and mountains in late November or early December. In May short term frosts continue into May and generally throughout the range the continentality of climate increases from west to east. Dense bushes of dwarf willow, wild rose and bareberry dominate the mountain scrubland while in other areas sparse woods and large stands of coniferous woodlands are found, and at higher altitudes alpine meadows and glaciers are found.

Horses on pasture with yurts in the background: Study area 1

2.8.3 Research sites

The expedition was working on the western tip of the Dzhungarian Alatau between altitudes of 1300m-3500m. The three study sites were east of Tekeli, and can be see in MAP III.In this region there are a high number of herders, with domestic goats and sheep, and horses.

15

Some herders also have cattle and Bactrian camels. The larger communities are lower on the plains, consisting of permanent households.

Study area 1: Koksu river valley, south side. This study area is difficult to get to and the pastures for domestic livestock are limited due to the valleys steepness. There were 23 herders in this region, herding at around 2200m-2600m. The road further east has deteriorated badly so no herding practices occur further east from this point.

Study area 2: There were thought to be 150-300 yurts in this region between Araltobais and Jarkent (Panfilov). The pasture system was more extensive and more heavily utilized by herders than at a similar altitude of that of study area 1. The pastures were more easily reached by herders by summer roads.

Study area 3: This study area was within the Kora river valley on the northern side of the western tip of the Dzhungaria. There were no herders in this valley, but there were 8 bee farmers’ houses, one of whom remains in the mountains all winter. This valley is the site of the ecotourism camp mentioned later in the report.

Despite the low altitude most snow leopard sightings in previous research (Annenkov 1990) have been between 1500 and 2500m, and reports from Kazakh guides sighted the proposed study area as the most likely region to study any existing conflicts between humans and snow leopards.

The habitat is grass and heath land, with more rocky and scree like terrain further up the valleys, and there are also scattered coniferous forests at altitudes of 1500m and below. It was summer during the teams stay, and the expedition experienced temperate conditions, with one in three days being light rain showers.

16

2.9 Map and Study Area Figure 1

20 km

17

2.10 Kazakhstan and Dzhungarian Mountains Protected Status

There are four major tiers of protected status for habitat, flora and fauna in Kazakhstan.

¶ The highest level of protection prohibits hunting, farming or any form of building or human habitation.

¶ The second tier is that of National Park status with each park generally comprising of: 1 Local farming zone 2 Guarded areas 3 Prohibited areas

The prohibited areas are afforded more protection than the guarded zones. This can often be unclear. Legal hunting is allowed in some zones of certain National Parks and is strictly monitored.

¶ The third tier of protection is areas called Governmental Parks which protect certain species (as opposed to entire ecosystems). This is usually species that are red listed in Kazakhstan, but do not have to be.

¶ The fourth tier is called Governmental Reserves which are designed to protect all animals which are red listed, and which number up to 73 in Kazakhstan, including for example snow leopards, mountain sheep, bears and certain vulture species. In these areas farming, herding and tourism are allowed and the level of protection is less than that of the above areas.

¶ There are also hunting reserves where hunting organizations work. Due to the nature of this hunting, requiring a healthy population of animals, these areas are well managed, and well guarded from illegal poaching. Permission for hunting can be granted outwith of these areas, although these areas are the formal and usual hunting grounds.

The study area falls within the ‘Almaty region’, of which the Taldy-Kugan region is part. At present the protection of the Dzhungarian Mountains consists of three governmental reserves, all managed by their separate regional offices; from west to east the Koksu, Lepinsk and Toxti reserves. The latter two are joined in the east whereas the Koksu is separate from these. The Koksu Governmental Reserve (22,000 hectares, 2200km2) has existed since around 1993 in conjunction with the set up of the ecological ranger’s offices in Taldy-Kurgan. The only other area with any protection is the hunting reserve within the Altynemel-Koyandytau Mountains, south of the main Dzhungarian range. Study area one and two were both within the Dzhungarian Governmental Reserve (MapIII).

2.11 Infrastructure of Lowland Areas

The road network of the low lying region around Taldy-Kurgan, and towards Almaty is well developed. The A-350 links Taldy-Kurgan with Almaty, which is also linked by rail. Taldy-Kurgan itself is a booming town with a modern shopping mall, cinema and several bars and restauraunts. Tekeli is less developed, but with much housing and recent development, though resembling the old mining town that it is. Kapal is less populated than in Soviet times, but along with Sarkand (east of Kapal), is one of the other main towns in the region of the Dzhungarian.

18

2.12 Flora and Fauna

In the Almaty region there is a total of 475 species of animals, 73 of which are red listed. In the lakes and rivers of the Taldy-Kurgan region there are carp, perch, zander, bream, sheat fish and trout. On the plain the are jeyrans (antelope), wolves, steppe foxes, badgers, steppe cats, steppe polecats, weasels and several rodent species. Within the Karatal, Aksu and Lepsy deltas and the shore of Lake Balkhash can be found wild boar, steppe deer and water rats. In the mountains maral (red deer), arkhars (mountain sheep), goats, bears, lynx and martens exist. A full mammal species list is shown below. Birds of the region include great bustards, black cock, pheasant, swans, geese, duck, quail, stone and steppe partridges, eagles, kites, hawks and eagle owls.

3. PERSONNEL

Report Author/Contact- Michael Riddell- Upper Chesthill Cottage, Glen Lyon,

Aberfeldy, Perthshire, PH15 2NH

Scotland Mobile-07834695967 E mail: riddellmichael@yahoo.co.uk

Michael Riddell: Expedition Leader

British, 22 years old. Biology Undergraduate. Main interests are exploration and conservation.In 2001 he spent seven months independently travelling in southern and eastern Africa. He undertook a field guide and bush training course and worked with the Swaziland National trust for several weeks. He also spent time working in townships and traveling in western Uganda. In 2002 he spent two months in Ecuador working on two reserves, one a high altitude cloud forest reserve, and the

other a coastal lowland rainforest reserve. He spent time working on a herpetology project and several community projects based around sustainable forest use. In 2003 Michael led a research expedition to central Namibia to study a free ranging population of red hartebeest. Working closely with a local wildlife NGO Michael organised the logistics for the 10 week stay in a remote bush camp. He has also spent time working with WWF, Highland Adventure Safaris (as a guide) and is editor of Newcastle Universities Independent Travel Magazine.Languages spoken- English, Spanish

Morgan Riley: Medical Officer British, 21 years old. Ecological Resource Management third year undergraduate. Main interest is sustainable development. In 1999, he undertook a biological field trip to the rainforests of Guyana. He participated in the Transatlantic Tall Ships Race 2000, finishing second in class. Trekked around Kenya in 2001, including spending two weeks living with the game wardens in the Masai Mara; then in 2002 undertook a solo expedition on foot across the hammada in Morocco. In 2003 Morgan was the team medic for the Crater Mountain 2003 expedition to Papua New Guinea. He has spent time

working in a soil research laboratory, in a bank and in a primary school. Languages spoken – English, German (basic) Full clean UK driving licence (2003).

19

Richard Rees: Environmental Officer (Also report author: richardrees56@yahoo.com ) British, 22 years old. Third year Animal Science undergraduate whose primary interests lie in ornithology and photography. Six months experience of trekking around Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador, Chile and Columbia in 1999 before spending seven months sailing across the Pacific exploring in particular the Galapagos and the Tuamotu Archipelagos, including the French nuclear test site of Mururoa. Spent six months working abroad in Australia and New Zealand. Richard participated in the Crater Mountain 2003 to Papua New Guinea as the team ornithologist. Summers work as a wildlife tour guide around the bird islands,

off the Pembrokeshire coast

Susannah Easton: Cultural Relations Officer British,21 Years old. Politics and History Undergraduate. Main interests ethnographics, cultural studies, and travel writing. Susannah has spent four months living and working in Lesotho, southern Africa. She was living with remote communities and working as a teacher and community organiser. She has travelled widely in Europe and in the UK spends time trekking in Scotland. Her main asset is her people skills, which are extremely well developed and tested. Her research ability is represented by personal projects in Nigeria. Susannah writes for the local newspaper the Courier and local politics

magazine the Whip. She rows for Newcastle Universities 1st VIII. Languages spoken- English and French.

Asset Bizhan:Translator Date of birth: 08/11/1985 Nationality: Kazakh Address Kurmangazy 157 App.32 Almaty Tel: 43-81-84 Asset studies economics at KIMEP University, and has worked previously in the Dzhungarian region.

Zhandos Bakbergenuly:Translator

Date of birth: 12/03/1984 Nationality: Kazakh Address: 3-24A-13 Kapchagai Almaty Oblast Zhondos is studying International Management at KIMEP University and has trekked widely in Kazakhstan previously.

20

4. KAZAKHSTAN: A brief glance

Land area / Geography –

Situated in the middle of Eurasia, Kazakhstan is at the point of intersection of major arterial roads, and thus a centre of historical, economic, religious and cultural links between west and east, south and north, Europe and Asia. The geographical position of Kazakhstan has been, in large measure, conducive to its development. The great caravan trade route, which is known as the "Great Silk Route" and linked Byzantium and China, cuts across the southern part of the country.

Kazakhstan borders on Russia, Iran, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and China. The geographical position between the Siberian taiga and Central Asian deserts, and between the Caspian Sea, which is the biggest inland water body of the continent, and the highest mountains of the Tienshan, results in a great variety of natural conditions and sites.

People

The word "Kazakh" means a free and independent nomad in the ancient Turkic language. The country has a very low population of 15.4million considering its vast size (2,717,300 sq km). Ethnically, the country is diverse, with Kazakhs making up over half the population, Russians comprising just over a quarter, and smaller minorities of Ukrainians, Germans, Chechens, Kurds, Koreans and Central Asian ethnic groups accounting for the rest. These groups generally live in harmony, though ethnic Russians resent the lack of dual citizenship and having to pass a Kazakh language test in order to work for government or state bodies. Kazakhstan faces large internal problems. It has a weak infrastructure, and large social problems such as poverty, drug addiction and prostitution. The country faces a sharp increase in Aids which is a common characteristic of these social problems. The most common languages are Kazakh and Russian. Whilst it’s most common faiths are Islam and Christianity. Whilst the Kazakhstan Media enjoys rights to freedom protected by the Kazakhstan constitution it often suffers harassment, coercion and censorship, for which the government has been criticised. It is also a criminal offence to criticise the government and its leader

History

In the 16-17th centuries, the territory of Kazakhstan, divided into separate khanates, was a type of political formation that did not have any administrative units, judicial bodies or written statutory codes. Those khanates were administered by families that were headed by beys.

By the beginning of the XXth century the following regions constituted the territory of Kazakhstan: Syrdaria and Semirechje ones (Turkestan general-governorship with the centre in Tashkent), Akmolinsk, Semipalatinsk, Uralsk, Turgay (Steppe general-governorship with the centre in Omsk); Mangyshlak - Transcaspian region; Inner (Bukeyev) Horde (in the Astrakhan province)

Economy and Industry

At present Kazakhstan is faced with a general economic recession. The average annual income for the country is $1,350.Production has been steadily decreasing since 1991.Colonization of

21

Kazakhstan by Soviets is closely associated with capitalist relations increasingly penetrating Kazakhstan. It brings along sharp class differentiation in the countryside, mass impoverishment, greater involvement of people in various industries and budding protest against colonial and social oppression became ever more pronounced during the soviet period.

Kazakhstan has been largely unable to benefit from its huge energy reserves due to the lack of adequate export pipelines. However, the opening in March 2001 of a pipeline linking the Tengiz oil field in the west to the Russian Black Sea port of Novorossiysk, has the potential to help transform the economy. Kazakhstan has also received generous foreign investment as it is an attractive investment location due to its mineral wealth. The country however lacks the foundations for development that could end its people’s hardships.

Politics

The Current President of Kazakhstan is Nursultan Abish uly Nazarbayev. He was first secretary of the Communist party when Kazakhstan was a member of the Soviet Union. He was re elected after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. Whilst Nazarbayev claims to promote democracy, he has centralised extensive powers into his hands and consistently extended his political tenure. In the 1999 election, the main opposition leader Kazhegeldin was barred, exiled and in his absence sentenced to ten years of imprisonment for misuse of office. Nazarbayev however has managed to preserve ethnic stability, despite cleavages between Russians and Kazakhs, whilst being able to carry out extensive reforms.

Value of Eco Tourism

The environmental situation in Kazakhstan continues to deteriorate due to the economic situation. On the whole, emissions of pollutants amounted to 3,094,600 tonnes in 1994. Kazakhstan is facing other problems, the glaciers in areas of Kazakhstan including the Zailiiskiy range of the Northern Tien Shan Mountains are melting at such rapidity that livelihoods will be at risk which could lead to political instability. Kazakhstan became a member of the World Tourist organisation in 1993. Tourism is largely state managed by the Committee for Tourism and Sports. In 1992 a Law on Tourism was established. It encourages virtually all types of tourism and specifies legal, economic, social and organizational fundamentals of undertaking tourism activities on the territory of the Republic. These include a number of documents regulating licensing of tourism activities. The tourism encouraged is generally of a historical nature tracing historic trade route such as ‘The Great Silk Route’.The Tourist industry has about 400 agencies employing around 7000 people.

Eco tourism is a new area of tourist development in Kazakhstan. In 2001 there was an international seminar, "Ecological tourism – an instrument of stable development in 21st century for transition economies of CIS, China and Mongolia", organized by WTO. In its final report the WTO stated that Kazakhstan can be considered as an ‘emerging market, which holds a great promise for ecotourism development. The relatively undeveloped and/or unexploited areas possess a rich natural diversity and a unique cultural and historical heritage, which can provide a solid base for the internationally growing ecotourism activity’. The report stresses the importance of keeping the fragile natural sites, wildlife and ecosystems protected and preserved, to create employment for communities including the nomadic peoples. However, it was pointed out that traditional tourism in the form of trekking, hunting and fishing also had to be carried out in a sustainable manner. Education and training of local people will be required to make these improvements, as the state tourism agency is concerned that the staff will not be properly trained and that the services offered will be poor. It consequently suggests that eco tourism in Kazakhstan

22

should be driven by NGOs and tour companies, which will mean that the government may miss out on an opportunity for development. The government has future development in mind with the introduction of environment preservation and protection into school curricula.

23

5. METHODS

5.1 A. Informal semi structured interviews with herders were combined participatory learning and action tools, and also key informant interviews with other stakeholders in the region. The team spent 2-3 week periods living and camping on the pastures: this gave a better idea of Kazakh herder lifestyle, conflicts with wildlife, perceptions and beliefs, and transhumance activities than would shorter periods in the field.

a. Semi-structured interviews.

Time was spent in the pasture areas to meet local herders and to build up trust thus yielding more accurate results. The semi-structured interviews were based on the methods used by a previous RGS expedition to Ladakh (Ref :4096) by Ashley Spearing (2000). Other advisors including Tom McCarthy (International Snow leopard Trust) also helped to formulate the questionnaire. This was designed to explore all aspects of conflict between snow leopards and humans discussed in the introduction, and also to look at the features driving these conflicts including past hunting and herding and demographic changes in the local population. A copy of the questionnaire can be found in Appendix I, although it must be remembered that the order of questions and the wording were adapted to the context of each interview: the questions were posed more diplomatically.

The students were trained in giving the interview, and in the rationale, so could phrase the question in the correct manner, depending on the respondent. The man of the household was questioned, although other family members were asked to fill in the wildlife perceptions section of the interview.

Broadly speaking the interviews contained the following content-

- Livestock herd composition - Livestock losses to predators and other losses (including natural causes and disease) in

relation to season - Methods of attributing kills to particular predators - Wildlife sightings in the area - Attitudes to the protected status of predators and ungulates in the area

5.2 b. Participatory Learning and Action tools

Time was spent around the pastures (2500-2700m), and with herders in the pastures. Participatory Learning and Action tools, and other informal methods were be used to collect the following information-

- Frequency of attacks in corrals versus on open pastures (also in interview) - Ranking of efficiency of guarding systems, and possible improvements. - Understanding of factors influencing livestock management system - Current market values of livestock - Average household income values

Current market values of livestock in the areas, and average household income values were also obtained from head-men of local villages, the Institute of Zoology and the ecological rangers.

24

5.3c. Key informant interviews

There was no set structure for the key informant interviews (although there should have been) as they were tailored for the specific interviewee. They sought to find out more quantitative data such as

- Past and present poaching of snow leopards in the study areas - Herders income per annum (to compare with answers given by herders) - Future plans for the study area (reserve or national park plans?) - Other sources of conflict in the region - Each interviewee was also asked what was the major threat to snow leopards in the range - Any form of corruption between officials

These interviews were scheduled in advance. Dates when the team would be back in Taldy-kurgan from one of the 2-3 weeks research spells were given to interviewees so that the interview could be scheduled. They were generally informal, with one person writing notes and one person asking the questions. These questions had to be translated by one of the two Kazakh students in all but one interview where the interviewee spoke English.

5.4B. Prey counts.

Prey counts were carried out in all three study areas. Because of time constraints most prey counts were carried out in mountain valleys and places directly adjacent to pasture systems. The prey counts were carried out in early mornings to ensure best use of the day. Ideally the transect would follow a valley bottom, but in many cases a ridge line would be followed to gain height

Prey count in a mountain bowl Transects were pre-defined on maps before departure and designed to walk around 8 km

one way. The route was designed so as to cover as much ground (looking down into mountain vallies and bowls) as possible. Regular stops were made along transects to scan the mountain-side for any snow leopard prey and any tracks and prey signs were noted during the transect. The location along the transect of all tracks, scat and animals were noted. The area covered accurately was recorded at the end of the transect. Appendix II displays one of the forms used.

25

Yurt on pasture with mountains in background

6. SYNTHESIS

By calculating the number of livestock predated on a yearly basis, it is possible to put an economic value on the price of snow leopard predation on livestock in the region covered. This loss, in economic terms, was then compared to average herder income. The income was calculated depending on the herder ‘type’ displayed in the results. Natural increase of livestock was included in the herder income unless herders were looking after someone else’s livestock.

Absolute numbers of livestock were also totaled, and guarding schemes and season can be compared to this loss.

It was possible during the stay in the region to obtain some information about poaching and past hunting. This is mostly discussed in qualitative terms, and is best analyzed so.

For more information on results analysis (which was purposely simplified) please contact he author.

7. MAP KEY

Map I- Snow leopard distribution map See below for key (letters and circles relate to sightings)

Map II- Snow leopard Prey Distribution map

= Governmental reserve border, present day.

= Proposed National Park, 2005 (will be a continuous unit, but eastern area controlled from Sarkand, western by Taldy-kurgan)

M= Red deer I= Ibex A= Argali SL= Snow leopard

Map III- Study Area Map Red circles indicate numbers of snow leopards from a National Parks count (2003). Black circles designate approximate study areas and base major camp positions are marked with a black cross.Green circles- approx. prey count areas.

A-

B-

C-

E.a-

E.b

-

F-

G-

H-

I-

J

K-

L-

M-

N-

O-

P-

Q-

MA

P I

79°0

0’

79°3

0’

80°0

0’

80°3

0’

45°0

0’

44°4

0’

I/M

I/M

I

SL/I

I

A

Ara

ltoba

is

Rud

nich

nee

Jark

ent(

Panf

ilov)

-15k

mso

uth

Alty

nem

el-K

oyan

dyta

u m

ount

ains

Teke

li

Tald

y-ku

rgan

(40k

m w

est)

Map

II

79°0

0’

79°3

0’

80°0

0’

80°3

0’

45°0

0’

44°4

0’

xx

x

x

xx x

x

Stud

yA

rea

1

Stud

yA

rea

2

Stud

yA

rea

3

Nat

iona

l par

k de

partm

ent’s

late

st sn

ow le

opar

d co

unt

(200

3). R

ings

indi

cate

dis

trict

s, an

d nu

mbe

rs in

divi

dual

s.

The

tota

l is 3

7- 1

0 ex

tra in

divi

dual

s exi

st fu

rther

eas

t tow

ards

the

Dzh

unga

rski

ve V

orot

a, o

n th

e no

rth si

de o

f the

mou

ntai

ns.

3

6

34

11

Map

III

44°4

0’

45°0

0’

79°0

0’

79°3

0’

80°0

0’

80°3

0’

26

8. RESULTS

¶ 45 herder interviews (semi structured): Representing 119 households.¶ 70 perception interviews (from the semi-structured) ¶ 5 ecological ranger interviews (key informant) ¶ Various formal (key informant) and informal interviews with stakeholders in the area

8.1 Transhumance

The Kazakh herders spend around 6-7 months a year in the mountain regions at around 2500-2700m. During the winter they live in villages close to the mountains in solid houses at around 1500-1800m. In these winter periods livestock are kept in solid, covered buildings. The livestock are grazed during the daylight hours in fields around the villages, and taken in at night. In the Koksu study area most herders were from Rudnichnee, whereas in the Bororhuzeer study area most herders were from Jarkent region.

During the summer period, the herders live in temporary yurts which are set up annually and carried to the pastures on horseback or by vehicle if available. The herders have to pay for this right to graze. Permits are required (obtained through ecological rangers) which include border permits checked by the military officials (in the Rudnichnee district, or the Jarkent district). They usually set up the yurt in the same place year after year. The corrals outside the yurt are more permanent, and left standing over the winter yet require some repair every year. Most supplies are taken with the herders, although livestock is depended on for a variety of dairy and meat produces. Sometimes cows are taken to the pastures purely for the milk. However, sometimes people will restock with fresh food using a vehicle. Livestock is kept next to the house in a corral, although horses are usually left out at night, or for many weeks. In the summer during the day the goats and sheep are taken out to graze about an hour after sunrise (around 7.30am) and brought back in and hour after sunset (around 6pm). Some herders will watch their livestock throughout the day, but others will leave them to graze.

In the Koksu river region there are only 23 recorded households, whereas there was reported to be up to 300 (thought to be realistically around 150-200) herding households between Araltobais (east of Rudnichnee) and the Ycek river (Map III)

Typical Kazakh Yurt on a high pasture at study area 1

8.2 StakeholdersNo official stakeholder analysis was conducted. However, the main parties that will be mentioned in the results below are: Kazakh herders Military officials (including border guards) Ecological Rangers

27

Officials of the National Park Board, Taldy-Kurgan Hunters and ex-hunters

¶ Kazakh farmers – see above. ¶ Military officials were contacted for border permits and also provided lifts into the

mountains for the expedition team. They also provided information of whereabouts of farmers. None were officially interviewed, although the relationship between military officials, border guards and government officials is mentioned below.

¶ Ecological rangers were employed by the relevant ecological office: and usually lived in the mountain region year round.

¶ The National Park Board is based in Taldy-Kurgan and provided information on general trends in wildlife poaching, herding practices and wildlife numbers. They are more involved in this area due to the proposed National Park in the Dzhungarian.

¶ Illegal hunters and ex-hunters were inevitably talked to throughout our stay. Only information from official interviews with ex-hunters is used, where the interviewee was aware of the study purposes.

Information received from the interviews was also discussed with Vitaly Kastcheev of the Institute of Zoology in Almaty.

8.3 Conflict with herders

8.3.1 Cost of predation

Table 1 below shows the percentage of livestock species present in the two study sites (study area three had no herders present), and the total number of livestock represented by all the interviewees. Study area two was reported to be superior for cattle grazing, and there were 20% more cattle relative to other livestock in this study area. This result means that the goat and sheep numbers are also different in both study areas.

Table 1: Percentage of livestock in the Koksu and Borhuzeer rivers Sheep Goats Cattle Horses Total Study Area 1 73.8 19.4 2.3 4.5 9723 Study Area 2 65.5 4.8 22.3 7.4 9004

The actual number of livestock lost to predators in the two study areas is shown below in table 2 and Figure 2. This was taken over a season (from late summer 2003-late summer 2004). The erratic results emanate from just two interviews out of 30, and were added to show an extreme case. It is however thought that they are false and were not included in further analysis.

Table 2: Actual deaths due to predators

Wolf Bear Snow

leopard Sheep Goat Cattle Horse Sheep Goat Cattle Horse

Study Area 1 37 17 0 0 13 5 0 0 0 Study Area 2 62 3 27 7 15 2 10 0 0

Study Area 2 with erratic results 87 3 33 49 15 2 14 2 0

28

Actual Deaths of Livestock from Predators

020406080

100120140160180

Wolf Bear Snow leopard

Predator and livestock type

Num

ber o

f dea

ths

in 2

003/

4

Fig. 2: Actual deaths of livestock from predators in the Dzhungarian (2003/2004)

8.3.2 Average livestock prices

Verified by National Parks board £1= 250 T 1$= 135 T

Tenge Dollars PoundsSheep 12000 90 48 Goat 6000 45 24 Cow 60000 445 240 Calves: 30000T (1/2 yr) 222 120 40000T (1 yr) 296 160 Horse 90000 666 360

In none of the formal interviews were any livestock found to have been killed by snow leopards. Therefore, snow leopards represent an economic loss of zero to the herders interviewed. It is thought this is true of the whole of the Dzhungarian range. Table 3 illustrates the percentage each cause of death represents (in economic value) in the two study areas. In both study sites natural causes represented a greater mortality rate than wolf and bear predation combined. It was impossible for the herders to distinguish between death by natural causes, by disease, or by poisoning from some plants.

Table 3: Percentage economic loss of total deaths Wolf Bear Natural causes

Study Area 1 22.5 7.2 70.2 Study Area 2 33.3 12.4 54.3

Using the maximum and minimum prices shown above (depending on animal condition) the economic loss to each herder and each household can be shown (farmer = one yurt, who may be looking after the livestock of several households in the lowlands).

29

¶ A total of 198 livestock were reported to have been killed by predators in the span of one year.

¶ Of these 127 were sheep, 27 were goats, 37 were cattle, and 10 were horses. The average prices (shown above) form the basis for calculating the average loss per household.

¶ On average each yurt lost 3 sheep, 0.7 goats, 0.8 cows and 0.2 horses every year (4.7 animals). This loss equates to 106020 T (£424/$785) or 76020 T (£304/$563) if the horses and cows are considered to be juvenile.

¶ Each yurt had a proportion of other people’s livestock that it was in charge of. The total number of people that the 45 yurts interviewed represented was 119 households. Therefore each family lost on average 1 sheep, 0.3 goats, 0.3 cattle and 0.1 horses (1.7 animals).

¶ This equated to 40800 T (£163/$302) or 28800 T (£115/$213). 8.3.3 Herder’s income

There are three main types of herders encountered in the region. Firstly private herders, whose livestock belongs only to themselves. Secondly collective herders, who looked after the livestock of other people, and of their own. Lastly ‘hired herders’, who were hired by one person in the lowlands to take up all that persons livestock and look after it for the season. 58% of herders were private herders, 33% collective herders, and the remaining 9% hired herders. This is not however strictly the case, and to confuse matters further there were combinations of the three aforementioned groups. The three group’s earnings also ranged, and therefore, like in other similar projects, estimates of the economic impacts of predators on herder’s livelihoods must be considered purely as estimates.

¶ The total average impact of wolves and bears on herders ‘wages’ was 6.6-9.3% of the herder’s annual wage (per herder). This can be broken down into the different herder ‘types’ and is shown in table 4 below.

Table 4: Impact of wolves and bears on herder’s income in the year 2003-4 Study area Percentage wage

Study area 1- Private 4.2-5.8 Study area 1- Collective 6.0-8.0

Study area 2- Private 4.6-6.5 Study area 2- Collective 12-18

Table 4 does not show average effect on a households (n=119) income because household incomes were not known from the lower valleys. The above cases focus only on average losses. It is important to note that although a general trend of losses was found (around one sheep from one hundred), there were reports of far greater losses in some individual cases. In 2002 a herder is reported to have lost 150 sheep, representing all of his livelihood. The sheep were chased by a pack of wolves from the pastures and lost down in the lower valleys. There were two cases of wolves getting into a winter enclosure/building and killing 15-20 sheep (of 150), but these were reported and were not associated with the interviewees. There were some results that were removed from analysis as the quality of the interview, or the answers given, was questionable. However, some farmers claimed to have lost 10 horses a year (out of 150). Although this might not be the case, it was apparent from interviews that the loss of livestock depended on the number of livestock being looked after and the experience of the shepherds. In this way some families may have lost up to 25-30% per year as opposed to the lower averages. The above incomes were calculated using set wages and the natural increase in livestock numbers which is considered an income because a proportion of the livestock is sold. However, if

30

the hired herder’s (9% of farmers) wage alone is considered the average loss per yurt is 150% their wage. Although the hirer of the herder will not make the hired hand pay if a body is retrieved, on several occasions it is impossible to retrieve the body. This shows the effect of predation is not equally distributed throughout the herding ‘community’, and the herders in the area cannot therefore be regarded as a homogenous group.

8.3.4 Wolves and bears

¶ Wolves and bears took the same proportion of livestock types, and the variation was only by 2-3% which did not prove to be significant.

¶ 77% of all predator-livestock related deaths (‘incidents’) were due to wolves, and the remaining 23% were due to bears.

¶ Similarly, mortality due to wolves represented 78% of the total economic loss, and mortality to bears the remaining 22%.

¶ Of the livestock deaths 65% were sheep, 15% goats, 17% cattle, and the remaining 3% horses.

¶ Wolves had an effect predominantly in winter (74% of incidents), and of these attacks over 70% were at pastures where tree cover, snow and fog make shepherding challenging. The remaining 30% were attacks within buildings.

¶ Wolf attacks during the summer all occurred when livestock was unguarded in the pasture (although some lost sheep were assumed to be killed by wolves)

¶ All bear incidents were in the summer due to the bear’s pattern of hibernation. ¶ 82% of all bear attacks were at pastures, predominantly in spring, post-hibernation, and in

autumn, pre-hibernation. The remaining attacks were in the lowlands in autumn or when herders were moving back to the lowlands

These results are displayed in the Figure 3 below. This is a summary figure: for winter wolf figures ‘guarded’ means in the buildings, and ‘unguarded’ means on the pastures (where they are watched by shepherds most of the time) and in the summer for wolves ‘unguarded’ also means watched by shepherds/out on the pastures. For bears ‘guarded’ means the livestock were in the coral at the time.

Wolf and Bear Livestock Predation: Season and Guarding

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Total Guarded Unguarded Total Guarded Unguarded

Winter Summer

Season/Guarding

Perc

enta

ge o

f cas

es

Wolves

Bears

Fig 3: Comparison of effect of predation of wolves and bears between seasons and guarding regimes.

Den

sity

/km

2

Rec

ent

trac

ks/d

ropp

ings

(p

er k

m)

Old

trac

ks

Oth

er

Stud

y ar

eaTr

anse

ct

Ibex

/arg

ali

Mar

mot

s G

roun

d sq

uirr

el

Snow

cock

Ibex

/arg

ali

Red

de

erSn

owco

ckA

ny

1

a 0

0.25

2.

25

0 0

0 0

0

b

0 1.

25

0.63

0

0 0

0 0

c 0

0.75

0.

75

0.25

0

0 0

0

2 a

0 0.

25

0.25

0

0.4

0 0

0.4

old

ibex

/arg

ali

b 0.

5 0.

3 0

0 0.

5 0

1 6.

4 ib

ex/a

rgal

i

3 a

1.1

0.3

0 0.

22

Freq

uent

0.

2 0

0

b

1 0.

1 0

0.4

Freq

uent

0

0 0

Him

alay

an b

row

n be

arT

able

5: S

umm

ary

of d

ensi

ties o

f pre

y (/k

m2 ) a

nd tr

acks

(/km

) for

seve

n m

ount

ain

prey

cou

nts

Prey

Cou

nt S

umm

ary

02468

Ibex

/arg

ali

dens

ityIb

ex/a

rgal

ire

cent

trac

kde

nsity

Ibex

/arg

ali o

ldtra

ck d

ensi

tyM

arm

ot a

ndsn

ow c

ock

aver

age

dens

ity

Prey

/trac

k ty

pe

Density

Stud

y ar

ea 1

Stud

y ar

ea 2

Stud

y ar

ea 3

Fig.

5: C

ompa

rison

of s

tudy

site

1 a

nd 2

ver

sus s

tudy

site

3 (d

ensi

ties i

n km

2 , tra

cks /

km)

31

A new policy was introduced by the government three years ago allowing any wolves to be killed. A bounty of 4000T/£16/$30 is given to anyone who can give an ecological ranger the pelt of a wolf. Many herders were without guns but in a few scattered cases herders have killed wolves. The policy is due to the high population of wolves throughout Kazakhstan, which is having an effect on people’s livelihoods and in some cases, on people’s health, through attacks on humans in rural areas. This could be beneficial to snow leopards through reduced competition for lowland prey in the winter time if enough wolves are killed.

8.3.5 Attributing kills

The herders knew if a wolf had killed their livestock usually by looking at the meat of the animal. If there was blood still in the meat, the animal had died a natural death. If the meat was ‘clean’ then it had bled during the kill, and it was attributed to wolf attack. The herders stated that there is no way to distinguish between a snow leopard kill and a wolf kill, but this was considered unnecessary due to the absence of snow leopard predation. There were reports from 1980’s however of snow leopards ‘sucking the blood’ from sheep, and not eating the meat. Wolves also do not eat the wool of the sheep, whereas some farmers stated bears will. Bear kills were normally witnessed by farmers when bears took sheep out of the corral in front of them.

8.3.6 Factors affecting predation

Seasonality and the degree of guarding affect rates of depredation. Wolves attacks were predominantly in winter (74% of incidents), and of these attacks over 70% were in the winterunguarded (out on lowland pastures) pastures The remaining 30% were attacks within buildings which were guarded by dogs in the winter. All bear incidents were in the summer due to the bear’s pattern of hibernation. 82% of all attacks were within the pastures, predominantly in spring, post-hibernation, and in autumn, pre hibernation. The remaining attacks were in the lowlands in autumn or when herders were moving back to the lowlands. Of all the bear attacks in the summer pastures 92% were when the livestock were within a corral, ie. at night. All the herders in the region used dogs to protect their livestock. Dogs act as an early warning to which herders respond by shouting, lighting fires or using flashlights. In most cases dogs and humans are unsuccessful in deterring bears. Some herders have guns which they fire in the air to scare animals. It is, however, thought that it is best not to aggravate bears near the livestock, in case a ‘killing spree’ is prompted. During the day herders watch their livestock although wolves can still break up a herd and kill a sheep. The level of guarding during the day varies from shepherd to shepherd, and many of the pasture losses in the summer are thought to be from when the livestock is moved from the lowlands and scattered as moving to the high pastures. Wolves rarely venture near the yurts at night, and of the 30% taken from corrals, herders admitted that most livestock were actually merely near the coral, not within it. In the winter, livestock are kept in closed concrete and corrugated iron buildings. During the day lower pastures are utilized, and due to the relative (compared to the upper pastures) complexity of this habitat, with much forest, and poor weather conditions, the majority of livestock are lost to predators when at pasture.

8.4 Demographics: overgrazing and disturbance

Previous reports from Kazakhstan and Central Asia have focused on the negative side of Soviet break-up; that of large scale unemployment leading to greatly increased poaching of snow leopards and snow leopard’s natural prey animals (see above). This is strongly supported by the

32

findings of this current study as having been the case (see hunting section). However, prior to the break up of the Soviet Union there were many more herders in the western tip of the Dzhungarian range than there are today, and indeed the rest of the range. Some herders estimate there were as many as five times as many herders herding in the mountains during the summer, but more regularly it was reported to be three times as many. With this many herders in these areas there is no doubt that overgrazing and disturbance were important factors affecting the snow leopard population. This study found no recent (since 1991) instances of snow leopards taking livestock, although there were two reported instances in the 1980’s. Both instances occurred higher in the mountains in study area 2 towards the easterly Ycek river. This was presumably because of the high numbers of herders in the area reducing the wild prey grazing areas and therefore making prey scarce for snow leopards. In study areas one and two it was found that after the break up of the Soviet Union the collective farms were abolished which led to a greatly reduced number of herders. After the collapse of the collective system, herders who were previously paid regular wages by the state were left unemployed. Herders gradually sold their livestock as a source of income, and fewer of them went to the mountains to herd. Most of the herders interviewed agreed that the numbers of herders in the region (both study area 1 and 2) are now slowly on the increase again. Although there is much variation of livestock prices in the market, it is in general on the increase, which is driving this most recent increase of herders. This increase, however, is not significant at the moment as the number of herders is still 3-5 times less than pre-1991.

Livestock numbers per herder (also asked in interview) have fluctuated with market prices. The feeling among herders is that size of holdings is ‘dependent on the markets’, and how much cash they need at any time. Most private herders have been able to increase their herd since the break up of Soviet Union, and many feel that private enterprise allows them to succeed. Although no hard numbers were obtained, it was found that the livestock numbers pre-1991 have risen roughly in proportion to the human population.

8.4.1 Disturbance

The herders in study area one, and throughout the Koksu River valley, have a limited disturbance impact due to the confined pastures that are utilised. This is a large valley and only the central area is used. Horse herders have more of an effect than goat or sheep herders that remain on the pastures themselves, whereas horses roam wild over 10 km from the yurt itself. Study area two, however, was more heavily herded, and the levels of disturbance were greater than in study area one. Not only the number of farmers but the extent to which the herders covered (yurt density), from Aralatbais to the Ycek river and all the way south east to Jarkent. However, in both study areas the levels of disturbance were lower than prior to 1991. Some interviewees reported that farmers used to see ibex, red deer and other animals (wild boar and roe deer) coming off the mountains and onto the pastures to graze in the early winter (prior to-1991). This is no longer the case, and it is apparent that there are not many wild prey animals left to be disturbed in the area. This suggests that illegal hunting is of far greater concern than disturbance (discussed below), a fact that was supported by both the interviews and the prey counts.

33

Pasture system of study area 2 looking towards the Kazakh-Chinese border

8.4.2 Overgrazing

No quantitative methods were used to assess the quality of the pasture. However, there was more grazing pressure from domestic livestock on study area two. Study area one had fewer yurts on the said pasture area. There was also grazing on the north side of the valley where there were very few yurts (6-7). Because of the poor state of the roads the yurts only went as far towards the border as the eastern end of study area one. There was grazing further east which was no longer utilised (and where many herders said there were more wild animals). Therefore there was a surplus of grazing in this region of the Koksu river.

8.5 Geography of the Dzhungarian Mountains: Habitat loss and fragmentation

Several reports from both ecological rangers and officials of the National Park board in Taldy-Kurgan suggested that the mountain conditions are better for snow leopard prey further east. This is due to the topography of the area (and the fact that there were fewer humans): in the east the mountains drop slowly down towards the plains, with long gentle valleys. The range itself is wider north to south (60km + from border north to plains) and means that animals can drop into uninhabited forest areas during the winter period. However, in the western tip of the range the main Koksu valley suffers extreme snow fall and animals are forced out of the mountains onto the hillsides and slopes surrounding the lowland villages. The mountains drop steeper into the plains, and there are less forests and winter pasture areas. However, the forests in the west of the Koksu valley near the towns are well established, but in study area two there are few forests and little space between the mountains and lowland villages. In the western area of the range, although the mountain area itself remains unpopulated, the regions around the mountains which wild animals are reliant on, are slowly being filled by human habitation. Without a baseline it is not possible to know how much this has changed recently. Smaller mountains to the south of the range are also used by animals in the winter, where there are roads and buildings. See Map I and II to see where snow leopards were found. Lastly, the shape of the range itself, elongate and spanning an international border, means that there is no inner sanctuary to the mountains during the winter period. It also means that animal trade over the border is not accountable due to its remoteness, and from the interview data it is likely that trade is a strong possibility (see below).

34

8.6 Snow leopard sightings

8.6.1 Sightings: Direct(seen) and Indirect (sign/tracks)

See Map IA- Winter 2002 (hunters) B- August 2001 (Dima- ex-hunter) C- Winter 2003/4: Two sightings by a bee farmer who stays in the mountains year round.

One when snow leopard took a goat, and second having seen tracks on roof of house. D- November 1999 (hunters, snow leopard seen from 75m distance) E- Sightings

a. October 1996 (hunter) b. Late summer 1989

F- Winter 1998 (farmer) G- Winter 1994 H- February 1991 (villager of Tekeli) I- 1990: Two sightings by villagers J- 2000. Snow leopard shot by villager. Near point where Sarovec-Jarkeny(Panfilov) road

crosses the mountains. The villager was walking with his gun and stumbled across a snow leopard in deep snow. The villager was afraid as the snow leopard appeared from nowhere, and so shot the leopard. This story was fairly dubious, and it is likely a cover story when the herder realised how interested we were in this case. If it is the case the snow leopard was likely tracked and shot.

K- Black circle on map. An old lady had seen a snow leopard in this region. A herders wife all her life she reported high numbers of cases where snow leopards took livestock during the 1970’s.

L- Herders friend saw two snow leopards September 2003. M- 1988. One snow leopard seen during a animal census. N- Snow leopard tracks seen in the spring snow in 2001. O- Two sightings by lady in Tekeli who takes tourists to this spot where there is a large

waterfall. The head of the Koksu river had a reputation in the area as an excellent area for snow leopards. This was confirmed by Vitaly Kastcheev of the Institute of Zoology and confirms work by Annenkov (1990).

P- Although no direct sightings come from this vast bowl of mountains, the area is devoid of all human contact and reputedly excellent for snow leopards (personal communication in the Institute of Zoology).

Q- Details unclear- Attempted use of poison to kill a snow leopard in 1998. Person was found by locals but not arrested.

8.6.2 Interviews and snow leopard sightings

Koksu Study Area 1- No herders in study area one had seen a snow leopard personally, and no herders had ever heard of one being killed in Kazakhstan. 3/15 herders suggested areas where snow leopards are heard to have been, or could be, but most merely suggested ‘the mountains’. It must be kept in mind that a lot of the herders never leave the area of the pastures and therefore will never be in the areas where snow leopards will use during the summer. The herders are never in the mountains in the winter, a time when the snow leopards are most likely to be in the pasture areas (around 2500m).

Bororhuzeer Study Area 2- 15% (n=30) of the herders had seen a snow leopard or snow leopards tracks. These sightings have been included on Map I. This is still a low number of sightings

35

although much greater than in study area one. The sightings were spread over a period of years (from the 1970’s), with no obvious pattern.

Two herders had heard of a snow leopard being killed in Kazakhstan. The stories were both vague. The first is J above on Map I, and the second the farmer was reluctant to give the reasons behind the killing, or where it occurred. It was in the region of Jarkent (Panfilov) during the winter.

As can be seen by Map I there is a wide spread of sightings throughout the expedition study area, the western Jungar. There is a cluster of sightings in the north around the Kora river. The other sightings are spread in areas where people visit, and few sightings come from the more remote areas where herders do not go.

8.6.3 Historical Records of snow leopard Numbers in the Dzhungarian Alatau

1979-1989 (information in this period): 50-55 individuals counted, 65-70 individuals estimated in whole range due to unsurveyed regions (Annenkov 1990). 1997: 20-25 snow leopards (Jackson and Ahmad 1997 (on information from Annenkov) 2003: 37 snow leopards (Map III) : from counts of National Parks office, Taldy-kurgan. (info gathered in 2003, but reported in 2004). This can be seen in the Figure 4 below:

Reported snow leopard density in the Dzhungarian Alatau 1989-2004

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Year

Snow

leop

ard

dens

it/10

0 km

2

Fig. 4: Reported densities of snow leopards from 1989-2004 (assuming Dzhungarian to be 8200km2 from Annenkov 1990) (red arrow shows the break up of the Soviet Union)

8.7 Loss of natural prey base

8.7.1 Local hunting

From the interviews with the herders, with rangers and members of the public, it became apparent that the Kazakh herders did not hunt significantly in the area. Ground squirrels were hunted, as

36

were marmots, but no animals the same size as or larger than roe deer. Some herders had weapons of their own, but even when asking herders who we had known for many weeks, we found that it was rare that they would use them to hunt with. There was only one case in which a herders ‘friend’ had retaliated and killed a bear. However, the team had the opportunity to talk to illegal hunters and to ex-hunters, usually of Russian descent who hunted on a more significant scale. Animals hunted are predominantly ibex, red deer, roe deer and mountain sheep: all the animals that provide good quantities of meat. Bears are also reportedly hunted but it is unknown if this occurs in significant numbers. It is not the case that the hunters are hunting from necessity for food, although it is generally that the lower social classes hunt illegally in this area. Sometimes only the bear or other animal fat is carried off the hill, along with the horns if they are also to be sold. It is no longer profitable to sell the meat, and it is therefore given to family and friends. However, there is more to the hunting than just food provision and it plays a role in society also. In most villages there is one hunter, who is renowned for his hunting. The hunters were generally passionate in their habits, and it is a traditional activity. Hunters were aware however that it has become increasingly hard to hunt in the western end of the Dzhungaria, mainly because bribes are less likely to be accepted by border guards or ecological rangers. That corruption still exists is indisputable, but on a smaller scale than post- Soviet break up. The introduction of formal licences also slowed the poaching rate down, although these are most likely easy to acquire. Although this constant level of traditional hunting which has decreased slightly since the 1990’s will always persist, as discussed below, it could fluctuate with employment in the local area. Within local hunters there is some form of sporting etiquette that means calves or 1st and 2nd year animals are not killed. It is really the winter time, when animals have no inner sanctuary in the mountains (due to the dropping out of the mountains due to harsh weather conditions) that are the times when animals are most at risk. However, red deer are usually shot in August and November. During the winter most of the mountain areas are inaccessible, limiting the hunting.. Most hunters also have their own territory they operate in, and stop others hunting in, and try to maintain a healthy population of animals. How true this is, is questionable, and not supported by the number of animals seen on prey counts. Legal hunting occurs in specified hunting reserves. However, it also seems to happen in study area one and two and the areas around the western Dzhungaria. Local herders see military helicopters land and the people from the helicopters go hunting. Austrian and German hunters have been hunting with guides in the local area. Although we were assured by ecological rangers that this was controlled strictly, the herders have noticed an influx in ‘city people’ coming to hunt in the area (a fact which they resent (see wildlife perceptions).

8.7.2 Hunting in the past-interviews

There was a general consensus among herders that the amount of hunting escalated in the early 1990’s. Levels of illegal hunting have now dropped since then, but to what level is unknown. Only a few herders had been in the region for long enough to comment on this, and found it very difficult to be exact. However, some comments included ‘the hunters came and the animals went to the mountains’, and ‘now tourists shoot too many and the herders have no control’. However, the number of wolves is thought to have increased (hence the government cull laws). Herders commented that they used to see animals on the pastures in early winter, and some even fed the wild boar by their yurts at night.

37

8.7.3 Prey counts and local animal distribution

Information about prey distribution from local hunters/ guides as to where the main concentration of animals are in the region is compiled in Map II. The main purpose of the prey counts in the current survey was to verify the information from the herder and hunter interviews. Because of the limitations experienced (see Fieldwork improvements) a summary only is given here. Rough routes of prey counts are shown on the Map III.

Lowland prey counts (in valley bottoms at around 2000-2500m) were not included as no animal sightings were made on these transects in any of the study areas. For study area one and two this was because the lowland areas were all pastures. However, for study area three two lowland surveys were carried out carefully but no red deer or wild boar were seen or other animals were seen.

Figure 5 shows a comparison of pasture prey counts (study area one and two) and non-pasture (uninhabited) prey counts.

8.7.4 Prey counts: General comments

Hunters report prey animals are easier to see in areas where there is no hunting (study area three). In study area one and two there is hunting by foreigners and other city people so that prey tend to be more flighty.

Ibex/Argali tracks are difficult to tell apart so were grouped together. However, counts of only 315 Argali in the Dzhungaria (NP Board 2003) suggest most tracks were ibex.

On most slopes (especially those north facing) between 2600-3000m with some scrub cover grey marmots were present.

No ibex/argali tracks were seen below 2700m (reflecting summer mountain use).

Study area 1: Prey counts conducted near study area one were close to pasture systems. No large prey tracks were seen, and the herder’s horses grazed deep into the mountains. There were reports of larger prey further east, but none close to the pastures in this area were confirmed. Numerous domestic livestock tracks are visible and tracks of human disturbance (litter and tracks) apparent.

Study area 2: Transects went deeper into the mountains in both of these prey counts. On the peaks and ridges some tracks (probably from spring when the snow was melting) of ibex or argali were visible following set trails.

On the south side of the valley there is a higher pressure from domestic livestock than study area one, and the pastures also rise up to 2700m. Although these mountains contain ibex they are of limited size (north-south around 8 km) and hunting is reported to be rife. Shots were heard on the prey count. Livestock/human disturbance affects the whole mountain range, as there are yurts on the other side also.

Prey count on the north side of the valley heads towards uninhabited and remote glens where 5 mountain rams were seen. Tracks were abundant (see Table 5 and Figure 5) in the mountain bowls at around 3200m north of the main pasture system.

Study area 3: With a local ex-hunter guide these prey counts were slightly biased. However, there was the greatest density of ibex tracks recorded out of all the study areas. Although there are yurts on the north side of the Kora valley near the plain, this was the most remote area surveyed. Of all the ibex seen (n=20) 15 were females, 3 calves, and 2 adult males.

Interviews-In study area one herders felt the most animals were to the east of the study area towards the Chinese border, and also towards the north east, across the Koksu valley. These were isolated areas, and in most cases herders felt one must travel at least 20 km east till more wild

38

animals are encountered. Ibex were most commonly noted as occurring in these areas, but also roe deer and wild boar in the forests. The herders noted that there would not be any snow leopard prey animals around in the mountain where they lived. Between the lowlands (Rudnichnee) ranger hut and the study area where a ranger stays, there is a vast area where it is possible that hunting occurs due to the lack of protection.

In study area 2 the same animals as study area one were mentioned, with ibex being mentioned the most. In most cases they were thought to be in the mountains to the north of the study area where there are more remote mountains, but there are also ibex and bears in the mountains to the south of the study area. The mountains to the south of the study area are smaller in area and height, but thought by locals to be an important wintering area for ibex and mountain sheep. Red deer and roe deer also occur in the forests (which are predominantly on north facing slopes).

8.7.5 Dzhungarian Alatau Mammal List (* seen by expedition team)

Numbers are for the entire Dzhungarian Range from a recent National park board (2003) survey. The numbers were obtained using formal counts, and were done as a continuing incentive by the ecological rangers and national parks department.

Central Asian wild boar (Sus scrofa) 800 Red deer/Siberian deer (Cervus elaphus) 1500 Siberian roe deer (Capreolus pygargus) 1600 Siberian mountain goat/Ibex* (Capra sibirica) 3040 Mountain sheep/Argali* (Ovis ammon) 315 Jackal (Canis aureus) Common wolf* (Canis lupus) Red fox* (Vulpes vulpes) Brown bear* (Ursus arctos) 460 Stone marten (Martes foina) Alpine weasel (Mustela altaica) Common weasel (Mustela nivalis) Stoat/Ermine* (Mustela erminea) Steppe polecat (Mustela eversmanni) Badger (Meles meles) Common otter (Lutra lutra) Pallas’s cat (Felis manul) European lynx (Felis lynx) 120 Snow leopard (Uncia uncia) 37 (Map I) Squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris) Long tailed ground squirrel (Citellus undulates) Yellow ground squirrel* (Citellus maximus) Steppe marmot* (Marmota bobac) Grey marmot* (Marmota baibacina) Artic hare* (Lepus timidus) 500

The nature of some of the counts (for example artic hare counts) must be brought into question considering the amount of ground to be covered by survey. The numbers were calculated by spot sampling.

39

8.8 Non selective killing (traps and poison) and trapping and killing for trade

Only one case of use of poison was reported. This was not in retaliation of snow leopard attacking livestock, but in an effort to kill a snow leopard for its pelt. This event occurred in 1998, and is shown on Map I by point Q. The predominant method of poaching snow leopards in the area was in fact thought to be shooting with a rifle (using bait) during winter when snow leopards are lower down out of the mountains (2500-800m).

The price to buy snow leopard pelts varied from 5000 to 20000 US dollars. Most people considered 10-15000 US dollars to be the standard price. However, it is thought by the expedition team that pelts could be bought at a cheaper price. A considerable network of hunters existed around the mountains, and outdoor shops in Almaty and Taldy-kurgan had links to people who could supply snow leopard skins. There was only one report from the northern part of the study area (Kora river) that poaching of snow leopard had occurred recently, but the poacher was not thought to be successful. This result merely indicates that direct poaching is still occurring. According to the National Parks board in Taldy-Kurgan the amount of illegal poaching of snow leopard pelts has dropped significantly throughout Kazakhstan since the mid-1990’s. Although ibex and red deer are mostly shot for meat, their horns are worth around 6750T (£27/$50) on the black market. Bear skins are worth around 27000-50000T (£108-216, US$200-400) depending on the species of bear (Tien Shan or brown), but the fat and liver are also profitable.

8.9 Local wildlife perceptions

Figure 6 below shows local herders perceptions of wildlife (n=70). Figure 7 shows how this varies between sex and age groups.

KEY- Animal perceptions1- Strongly dislike 2- Dislike3- Neither dislike or like 4- Like5- Strongly like

Wildlife Perceptions: All Interviews

00.5

11.5

22.5

33.5

44.5

5

Wolf

Bear

Snow le

opard

Fox

Red de

erIbex

Mou

ntain

shee

p

Animal

Ratin

g

Fig. 6: Average perception of each animal (n=80)

40

Wildlife Perceptions: Gender and age comparison

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

WolfBea

r

Snow le

opard Fox

Red de

er/dee

rIbe

x

Mountai

n shee

p

Animal

Rat

ing

All

Men

Women

Children

Fig. 7: Wildlife perceptions of all men, women, children and all categories interviewed

8.9.1 Proposed reasons for perceptions

¶ Wolves: Wolves were the most disliked of all the predators. The main reason given for this was the high number of livestock that they kill. There are also stories in the Dzhungaria of people being attacked by wolves. From this people are generally scared of them, and herders also say that they are ‘clever’ or ‘cunning’ due to their behavior in the winter when they get into buildings or when they are hunting livestock from within the trees.

¶ Bears: There was a huge range of scores for bears, resulting in the medium score of 2.7. Bears took significantly less livestock than wolves (around x3 less) and so although they were still a pest to livestock, they were less disliked. Some herders liked bears, as they liked them from their childhood. Only a small difference between men and women in the results was found (2.2 vs. 2.8) although women appeared more pragmatic towards bears than men (in their comments).

¶ Snow leopards: there is an obvious mismatch between the number of livestock snow leopard kills in the region (0) and the perceptions of snow leopards. This comparison is shown below with an explanation of why snow leopard got a score of 3. However, herders also used other reasons to classify snow leopards on the ranking table:

o Bad (1/2)- Snow leopards are predators and therefore people are scared of them, or associate them with wolves/bears

o Bad-Snow leopards are predators and people have heard stories of snow leopards killing livestock or killing people. The latter are myths, but the harm of livestock and people was the most used reason to dislike snow leopards.

o Bad- there are myths that say ‘a snow leopard will suck your blood’ o Bad- the name itself is ‘scary’ (snow panther) o Good (4/5)- people may want to see a snow leopard as they think they are

beautiful animals o Good- the skin/pelt of a snow leopard is very beautiful to put in your house

41

¶ Foxes: foxes were also considered predators. The main reason given for disliking them was that they eat the ground squirrels which people like to use for their fat.

¶ Ibex, argali, red deer and roe deer: All these ungulates were considered very beautiful, or graceful. Herders liked to tell stories of when they had seen them in the mountains and how the animals had reacted. The highest scoring was argali, which could be due to its rarity in the Dzhungaria.

¶ Many other animals were mentioned in this section but few had relevance to the project. Birds like snow cock were much liked. The most holy of birds is the swan, which receives much respect in Kazakhstan.

8.9.2 Perceptions of snow leopards versus predation

A comparison can be made between the number of livestock killed by each predator and the Kazakh’s perception of that animal. In Figure 8 can be seen that wolves make up the most kills, followed by bears. Snow leopards do not kill any livestock. It was hypothesized that the perceptions of predators would match this. This is the case with wolves and bears, wolves being more disliked than bears. Wolves kill 3x the livestock that bears do, and the perceptions match this, with bears being at 2.7, which is nearly ‘neither like or dislike’, whereas wolves were virtually 100% really dislike. Snow leopards however are only 0.3 from bears, at 3, neither dislike or like. The herders who were indifferent were not included in this analysis (indifferent-didn’t know about snow leopards or didn’t care to comment as so little experience of them) although some of this in difference may be still showing from the herders answers.

Total deaths due to predators

Wolf

Bear

Snow leopard

Fig. 8- Livestock deaths due to predators

8.10 Other results and information:

8.10.1 Tolerance to predation

There was a huge range of people’s tolerance to predators. It was a difficult concept to ask, and the questions asked when the herder would be so angry that they would kill the predator (snow leopard used as an example). Generally the herders felt that if three to four livestock were killed by seemingly the same predator consecutively then they would be angry enough to want to kill the predator. However, many answers were also ‘the first animal that is killed’. The results of this part of the questionnaire are therefore dubious. For this reason it was not tested whether tolerance changed with amount of stock held or any other factors. However, the range of ‘acceptable’ loss of livestock to predators ranged from 0.5/1% of stock to 30% of stock, highlighting the heterogeneity of views.

42

8.10.2 Herder’s employment

Only 17.5% of all herders interviewed had another form of employment during the winter period. The other 82.5% spent their winter looking after their livestock. The older shepherds rested during this period. The jobs that herders did have were predominantly part time and included taxi driving (any car acts as a taxi in Kazakhstan), furniture making, saddle/bridle/ whip making. This highlights the farmer’s dependence on their livestock as generally their only source of income throughout the year.

8.11 Local awareness of protected area status

8.11.1 Awareness of protected area status

The knowledge of the protected area was originally hypothesised to be good, as herders have to obtain permits to enter the region each year from ecological rangers. All herders interviewed were within a governmental reserve. Because the two study areas were both within the governmental reserve, all red book species, and in this case all species (of animals and plants) were protected by law.

¶ 68.3% of herders knew that everything in the region was protected by law. ¶ 29.3% of herders had partial knowledge of which species were protected by law. These

species were usually large fauna (that are hunted by others) for example ibex and bears. ¶ Only 2.4% of the herders had no knowledge of what was protected by law. ¶ The knowledge about the law on killing wolves was misunderstood. Some herders were

unaware that they were lawfully able to kill wolves.

8.11.2 Attitudes towards protected area status

Herders were asked what they thought of the protected area. ¶ No herders thought the protected area was a bad thing ¶ 94.3% thought that the protected area was a ‘good’ thing ¶ 5.7% of herders thought the protected area was a good thing, but that high predator

numbers associated with protected areas is a bad thing

It is possible to rank the herders ‘values’ of nature depending on their statements towards the protected area. These values have been categorised many times, for example Kellert (1993) looked at the biological basis for human values towards nature, and designed nine values relating to perceived benefits from nature. However, due to the low range of values displayed here, this kind of categorisation is not used. Therefore the main divides in people’s perceived benefit from the protected area are shown in the chart below. It is important to note that all of these related to animals (probably because animals were being discussed at this point in the interview).

Value Value

Use---------------11% Non-Use---------89%--------------Bequest Value------------8.3% --------------Option Value --------------Existence Value----------91.7%

Fig. 9- Percentages of interviewees who portrayed a particular value

43

8.11.3 Non Use Values

Hunting was the only use value mentioned in association with the benefits of the protected area. The majority of non-use values were existence values, the benefit gained from knowing something exists. There were a few herders who thought wildlife should be protected for future generations, displaying bequest values. Some general categories of attitude statements can be made:

Utilitarian(Use)‘The protected area is good because there will be more animals for us to hunt’

Symbolic(Non use) ‘Protected areas make Kazakhstan a better place’

Naturalistic(Non use) ‘Protected areas preserve the spirit of the mountain’ ‘Nature would loose meaning without wild animals’

Aesthetic(Non-use) ‘Ibex are beautiful’

Moralistic(Non-use)‘Animals have the right to exist’

‘Wild animals are natural and should not be killed’

Of all the attitudes towards animals in the protected area the naturalistic, that animals are a natural part of the mountains, was the most commonly held. Symbolic attitudes were because animals were seen to promote Kazakhstan as a country. Moralistic comments were generally because people felt that animals had the right to exist.

8.11.4 Other Uses of Wildlife

Herders were asked if they saw any other uses for snow leopards, snow leopard prey, or wildlife in general (other than those the interviewee had already mentioned). The following categories were designed post study:

Table 6 –Herder suggestions of other uses of wildlife in the area Use Percentage of suggestions(%)

Tourism 5.7 Utilitarian-Plants 0 Utilitarian- Animals 56.7 Existence Value 26.4 Don’t know 11.3

¶ Tourism was highlighted as a possible form of income by only 5.7% of interviewees ¶ Utilitarian uses of animals were: (percentage of all utilitarian)

o Medicine(70.6%)- percentage below are of all medicine mentioned Á No specific medicine mentioned-42.3% Á Bear liver or fat- 19.2% Á Deer horns- 3.8%

44

Á Wolf liver- 3.8% Á Ibex horns- 3.8% Á Mountain sheep horns- 3.8% Á Ground squirrel fat- 11.5% Á Vulture liver- 3.8% Á Badger fat- 7.7%

o Food from hunting (16.7%) o Predators get rid of dead livestock carcasses (8%)

¶ Existence values o Symbolic- 21% (for Kazakhstan’s status) o Aesthetic- 21% (Animals are beautiful) o Naturalistic- 57% (Part of nature)

8.11.5 Medicinal uses of local fauna and mythology

Several uses of wildlife were suggested by herders. The herder’s wives seemed to be better informed as to the uses for medicine, and many of the men were aware that some animals had medicinal properties, but were unable to say what they were. The fat of ground squirrels was used widely for colds, flu and other such ailments. It is also meant to be good for ones liver. Bear and badger fat are used to keep warm up arms and legs, when rubbed on a cold part of the body. Red deer, ibex and mountain sheep horn were all suggested as ‘good medicines’ for all ailments, and are cures for any illness. These are generally ground up and drank. Bear liver was mentioned often, and along with vulture liver, has medicinal properties used for flu and are meant to be good for ones blood. Wolf liver was also mentioned, but only once, to have the same effect. No plant medicines were directly mentioned in interviews. However, two plants were used by Kazakh friends of the team. The first is called Golden root, and is thought to be a relation of Gin-Seng, which is drank in tea as a herbal mixture for all round well-being. The second plant is called Mharal- root (Red deer root), because it is proposed to be eaten by red deer during the rutting season (late September onwards). Its effects are likened to those of Viagra, and although the team did not test this the Kazakh men were adamant about its properties.

8.11.6 Conservation Incentives

The question ‘what would encourage you to take part in snow-leopard conservation’ was asked to most herders interviewed. This question was taken from interviews in India and Pakistan where herders engage in snow leopard killing in retaliation to livestock killed by snow leopards. Because this does not occur in the Dzhungaria range, the question was deemed invalid. However, when asked, the general opinion was that encouragement to conserve snow leopards was not required. This is because herders had not seen many snow leopards, and did not hunt them, but felt all animals were part of the natural environment. One of the comments was “the wealth of the land is enough incentive for conservation”. Because it is against the law to hunt snow leopards, people did not need encouraged, as they felt the law was enough. The idea of subsidies from the government for livestock taken by predators was suggested once by a herder. It was again pointed out that the herders did not need to be encouraged to conserve the local wildlife, as it was city folk who were shooting it, and these people generally came through the ‘officials’.

45

8.12 Ecological Rangers (Wardens)-Key Informant Interviews

It was extremely difficult to distinguish what role ecological rangers play in the communities and with the herders. Some refused to talk with us whereas others were more open. The main points from the ecological ranger interviews are shown below:

¶ Each ranger is covering too much area: there are not enough rangers in the study areas although there has been an increase in the number of rangers in the last 5 years.

¶ The rangers are poorly equipped, but given weapons, uniforms and saddles on an annual basis

¶ The rangers fees are not adequate, although the fee was not given ¶ New incentives are being introduced by the National Park bodies to give cash rewards to

rangers who catch illegal hunters: the cash rewards are part of a poacher fine ¶ This incentive has increased the number of poachers caught recently ¶ All rangers agreed that illegal hunting is still occurring in the study area ¶ Ecological rangers have annual exams relating to land management and ecology, and

their environmental knowledge was thought to be good ¶ The ranger network works in all main towns at the base of the mountains (Jarkent,

Rudnichnee, Taldy-Kurgan, Sarkand, Kapal and Lepinsky). ¶ The relationship between army border guards and the rangers is unknown but should be

considered with caution

9. SUMMARY OF RESULTS

¶ No snow leopard related livestock deaths¶ Losses of between 4.2-18% of herders income due to wolf and bear depredation ¶ 77% of all predator-livestock related deaths (‘incidents’) were due to wolves, and

the remaining 23% were due to bears. ¶ Disturbance by herders of more concern in study area 2 but both study sites,

regardless of herders numbers are thought to have a significant disturbance effect on wild prey

¶ Overgrazing was not thought to have a significant effect on leopard wild prey ¶ Both overgrazing and disturbance have dropped significantly since pre-1991 ¶ Geography of the region, especially the Chinese-Kazakh border, means the range

is more susceptible to leopard and prey poaching and trade ¶ Climate in the western region of the Dzhungaria is worse than in the east

effecting animal numbers ¶ Leopard sightings low and generally from the winter period ¶ Hunting of leopard prey increased dramatically post-1991 and hunting is still at

significant levels today ¶ Local farmers are not involved/major contributors to this hunting ¶ Prey counts dubious but indicate low wild prey numbers within and away from

the pastures in study area one and two, but higher densities in study area three ¶ Difficult to gauge level of direct hunting of snow leopard but considerable

network of hunters exists and leopard pelts offered in Almaty and around the Dzhungaria mountains

¶ Snow leopard perceptions do not match livestock depredation, but wolves and bears do

¶ Local herders had extremely positive attitudes towards the protected area illustrating a high percentage of non-use reasons for attitudes

¶ There are not enough ecological rangers for them to be effective and they are often poorly equipped and underpaid

46

10. FIELDWORK IMPROVEMENTS

It was almost impossible to reduce the social desirability bias which is associated with interviews. The team introduced themselves as biologists from the UK with interest in the livestock management and associated depredation in the region of the Dzhungaria.

Most of the questions were ‘open ended’ sometimes resulting in extremely long (up to 1.5 hours) interviews: the use of more choice/statement or dichotomous questions would have been advisable – meaning more interviews could have been carried out.

Originally the ‘how many livestock do you have’ question was one of the first questions in the interview. However, this is possibly most personal question of all, ‘how much do you have in your bank’- and it was soon relegated to later in the interview when the herder was more relaxed.

Some questions became redundant and had to be left out. In the same case some question were added.

More accurate statements/questions for tolerance- this could have been tested in relation to peoples income/livestock numbers or other factors.

The prey counts were difficult due to the time demands on the team. The team was also relatively inexperienced in this field, and it took time to get use to the Kazakh Mountains.

47

11. DISCUSSION

Many of the research results were qualitative, and speak for themselves. Interactions between predators and pastoralists relates not only to snow leopards but also to wolves and bears. However, this relationship is considered important to overall wildlife protection in the Dzhungarian Mountains, so was emphasised in the results.

It must also be remembered that only 45 herder interviews were carried out. This is cannot be considered a representative sample, so all results must be treated with caution. However, this number of interviews reflects the diversity of other activities, including prey counts, key informant interviews and hunter interviews that were being carried out by the expedition team. Time and in the difficulties experienced in working in such a remote area for the first time were also constraints. Because all of this data is comparable, it is thought that the interviews carry more weight than their numbers suggest, as trends in interview data became obvious after only a few interviews. In study area one over 90% of the herder population was interviewed (so is a representative sample), which is more than adequate, although this figure was less in study area two.

The sections below discuss the results in reference to past Kazakhstan and Central Asian reports, along with some comparisons to other Himalayan countries.

11.1 Conflict with herders: Cost of Predation

This study finds no evidence of livestock deaths due to snow leopards in the Dzhungarian range. This supports a report by Yamaguchi (2001) stating that domestic livestock rarely come into contact with snow leopards in Kazakhstan. Yamaguchi emphasizes that killings resulting from conflict with herders do not pose a significant threat to the species in this country.

This research also supports, for the Dzhungaria at least, the review by McCarthy and Chapron (2003) which highlights loss of natural prey base and direct hunting to be the major threats in Central Asian region and northern range of the snow leopard.

11.1.1 Bear and wolf predation

Having established that retaliatory killings by herders are not a form of conflict in the Dzhungaria, it is possible to compare the amount of predation in the Dzhungarian range with that recorded from other countries. The results from the Dzhungaria are shown clearly in table 2.

The absolute amounts of money involved (economic effect of predators on farmers livelihoods) were different than countries in the Himalayan areas (as defined by McCarthy and Chapron 2003) because of the different stages of economic development between Kazakhstan and these countries. However, the amount of money relative to annual income in many cases was equivalent. Therefore looking at effects on annual incomes:

¶ Spearing (2002) found annual loss was on average 14% of annual income in Zanskar, India

¶ McCarthy (1999) found an annual loss of 6-10% of the annual income in Mongolia

¶ Oli et al (1994) found and annual loss of 20% of the annual income in Nepal ¶ An annual average loss of 8% of the annual income was found in the

Dzhungarian range, Kazakhstan (current study)

The Dzhungarian loss is due to bears and wolves, while the others are due to snow leopards. However, in Kazakhstan the actual amount of money was greater. For example Spearing (2002) estimated an average of US$54 loss on average every year in India. Although the average percentage of income was less, the actual amount of money in Kazakhstan was almost x6 that of Zanskar ($213-312 on average, per household). This is thought to be a

48

reflection of the relative wealth of the Kazakhs, but also the different market prices for livestock in the different countries.

Although this loss by predators in Kazakhstan can therefore be seen as less than in other countries, it must be remembered that in many cases the depredation is not evenly distributed among the herding community (Jackson 1995). ‘Communities’ are in no ways homogenous. This is clear when regarding ‘hired herders’ who have a set wage and if they are subject to average losses, could be losing up to 150% of their seasonal wage in a season. This is comparable to Oli (1994b) who recorded a household losing up to five times their per capita income in one attack in Nepal. Other severe cases in the current study included the loss of 100% of all livestock due to predators chasing livestock (reports from previous years).

There was a trend in depredation due to both season and level of guarding. Bears took livestock from the corrals on 100% of occasions (all in the summer), despite guard dogs, using fires and chasing them away. Bear predation matches their annual cycle, feeding heavily immediately before and after hibernation. Better protected corrals (in the lowland pastures with forests corrals had 6-8 foot wire fencing around them) could help to reduce this predation rate, as bears ignore dogs and lean over the wooden fences to take sheep.

However wolves are more of a problem in the winter (74% of cases) when the livestock are in the winter (lowland) pastures. In all cases the shepherds are taking all the precautions necessary to protect their stock against wolves, but the more inexperienced herders would lose more livestock due to poor shepherding. Better protected corrals could prevent bear depredation, but it seems that wolf predation is more logistically difficult to stop, and the new government ruling on shooting wolves is the Kazakhs solution to high wolf numbers at this stage.

Bear track on path near camp

11.2 Disturbance and Overgrazing

The changes in the number of farmers in the Dzhungarian Mountains is highlighted in the results from the interviews. This is mentioned in more detail below in the loss of natural prey section. However, the changes in the number of people in the region does support previous findings (Koshkarev 2000, Koshkarev and Vyrypaev 2000) which document the threats to snow leopards in the post-Soviet states in some detail. Much negative information emanates from these reports. This is generally justified due to the staggeringly high levels of poaching that occurred post 1991. However because of the break up of the Soviet Union, the number of herders that used the mountain pastures reduced dramatically as they sold their stock. Any previous disturbance and overgrazing effects on snow leopard prey, and resulting pressure on grazing systems, have therefore reduced dramatically, although this was at the cost of herder’s livelihoods at the time.

The extent and the pressure of grazing in study area two was greater than in study area one. All herders in both study areas commented on how good the grazing in these regions is (‘that is why we come here every year’), and the fact that there used to be far more herders in the same amount of space. These points both suggest that:

49

- Although the grazing pressure is higher in study area two, overgrazing perse is not occurring.

o Firstly, even if the pastures are in a worse state than before, there was no evidence that there are enough wild animals to compete for this grazing. Á Even if the grazing were of reduced quality, this is thought to be

a smaller effect on snow leopard prey species than disturbancecaused by herders

o Secondly, there used to be far more herders with livestock and far more wild animals in the region (prior to 1991), highlighting that the region is able to support more wild and domestic animals than it is currently supporting.

The conclusion is that overgrazing is unlikely to be having any significant effect on numbers of wild prey animals at the present time, but may have done so in the past.

There is thus a potential for an increase of herder numbers in the western range of the Dzhungaria, if livestock prices continue to rise, especially in study area two which is far more accessible and offers easier herding conditions than the Koksu river valley, study area one. It is doubtful that the herders, the Kazakhs, have ever had a strong effect directly on snow leopards through hunting, though there is no doubt that the significance of the indirect effects (overgrazing and disturbance) has decreased dramatically since 1991. Braden (1994) states that one of the problems facing conservation in Kazakhstan will be maintaining reserves against the economic pressures of domestic herd expansion. This does not seem to be the case in the Dzhungarian Mountains at the present time, although the herder numbers in these regions should be monitored. Disturbance of snow leopard prey is still of concern in the western end of the Dzhungarian range where there are far higher human populations than further east. Despite the wide ranging herders in the mountains here however, the effect is thought to be negligible compared to other conflicts discussed below.

11.3 Habitat loss, fragmentation and range geography

Annenkov (1990) reports that snow leopards inhabit lower altitudes than other Central Asian leopards: from 800-3500m above sea level, and are generally observed from 1000-2500m. This is explained due to topographic factors and resulting prey distribution at these altitudes, which was supported here. However, this altitudinal distribution means that snow leopards are more exposed to humans, especially during the winter period, and especially in the western end of the Dzhungaria. Many of the sighting reports were from winter periods, when the snow leopards are easier to track and closer to human habitation. Although this is not a route of conflict itself, it enhances the chance of poaching at this time of year. However, no increase of inhabitation was noted in any of the interviews as a potential conflict, and the mountain region is remote, especially in the east. The borders of the proposed National Park (mentioned in ‘Dispelling conflicts’ below) is to be limited due to human habitation: unfortunately the areas with human habitation are thought to be the natural wintering grounds of many of the prey species, and therefore, of snow leopards. There is therefore some evidence of habitat restriction during winter months. The position of the range opens it up to trade with Chinese border officials and locals. On the south side of the range, east of the study area, there is a growing Chinese population on the Chinese side (Military Commander, pers.comm). Not only pelts, but mainly bones for medicines (discussed below) are more likely to be crossed to the Chinese side (Theile 2003). Certainly the trade of medicinal plants was known to occur over the border in 2004, so it is likely that other animal parts are also exchanged. The border splitting the mountains is therefore a problem, and discussed more below.

50

11.4 Snow Leopard Sightings and Densities

Snow leopard sightings by local people give a good indication of current and past distribution of snow leopards, although snow leopards are wide ranging. It is of concern how few sightings or even how few herders have heard of sightings in the area (especially study area one), or seen tracks and other sign of snow leopards. This is an indication that the snow leopard population is still low, as stated in previous reports (Annenkov 1990, National Park board survey 2003).

Sightings were well spread out, although many sightings were from the Kora river. It is likely that the reason for this here is three fold. First, there is a lack of any disturbance by herding practices. Second, there was a greater density of ibex and other prey in the area (due to good grazing slopes and natural mountain watering points), and third, the reports came from two wildlife hunters who spend a lot of time in the region, and also from a bee farmer who spends the whole winter in the mountains. The minimal viable population (MVP) for snow leopards is considered to be around 50 individuals (Green 1994). This is dependent on the individual’s density, any previous genetic impoverishment, and levels of immigration and emigration from the population. In the 1990’s the snow leopard population in the Dzhungarian Mountains dropped well below this (to 20-25 individuals). However, this is only within Kazakhstan, whereas the range runs east south east to join the main Tien Shan, within China. It is thus very important to ensure the future maintenance of this corridor with the Tien Shan, as it is likely that the population has already dropped below the MVP on the Kazakh side of the border.

If the results from the 2003 counts are correct there is evidence for population recovery, but it is possible the population is still below its MVP (on the Kazakh side of the border). With a density of 0.45/100km2 (37 snow leopards) in 2003 on the Kazakhstan side of the border, an area of 11,100km2 is needed to maintain the snow leopard population at 50 individuals at its current density (whereas at snow leopards highest densities (5/100km2) only 1000km2 is required to remain above their MVP).

In 1989 populations were well over the MVP (Annenkov 1990). However, although the Dzhungarian range is around 8200km2(Annenkov 1990), this is not all protected at the moment, and the conflicts discussed above exist. In summary, at current population densities, more land needs to be protected, or conflicts completely stopped. As discussed below, it is not a case of protecting more land, but effectively protecting existing mountain regions.

11.5 Loss of natural prey base through hunting

Whereas in some countries natural prey numbers may be low due to overgrazing and disturbance by domestic animals in Kazakhstan the loss of natural prey is predominantly due to overhuting (and disturbance and overgrazing have been considered separately).

There was a lot of evidence from herder’s interviews and key informant interviews that the number of wild animals in the region has dropped significantly post-1991. This supports all previous reports on Kazakhstan including Braden (1994), Koshkarev and Vyrypaev (2000), Theile (2003) and Koshkarev (2002a and b). Jackson and Ahmad (1997) comment on the increased size of all protected areas in Kazakhstan, but state that these are not assisting in the preservation of snow leopards in Kazakhstan due to the low level of protection offered. This seems to be the case for snow leopard prey in the Dzhungarian Mountains, (Koshakarev and Vyrypaev 2000) where poaching levels post-Soviet break-up increased by 3-4 fold. This was strongly supported by all the interviews in 2004.

The main reasons given by these authors in the increase in snow leopard poaching and wild prey hunting are:

¶ Failure to pay salaries and wages from 1991 on (resulting in economic deprivation) in all sectors, including ecological rangers

¶ Collapse of collective farms and cooperatives in rural areas resulting in unemployment

51

¶ Loss of governmental infrastructure to control black market ¶ Rise in levels of corruption, with above lead to higher levels of poaching ¶ New international borders ¶ A dramatic increase in demand for raw materials for Chinese medicine

The economic incentives apply more to snow leopards than their prey. All these findings were strongly supported by our results, with the prey counts providing evidence of the impoverishment of wild prey. Since 1991 prey numbers are not recovering, as herders insist numbers are still very low. Interviews with herders suggested that his is more likely due to hunting in the region. Because of the traditional role that hunting plays in society, it is not probable that the hunting will decrease significantly even if employment increases. However, park protection could make a significant difference in poaching levels. Problems of both local employment and park protection need to be dealt with consecutively. Although legal hunting is licensed, the sustainability of this activity does not take into account illegal hunting, or the low numbers of animals in the region. This level of legal and illegal hunting is thought to be suppressing present populations of wild animals.

Ibex skull found at around 2800m

Koshkarev (2000b) states that foreign hunting groups from Europe and the United States have found all the Central Asian independent states to be a new opportunity for hunting big game animals. Game hunting has its place in conservation, especially considering how lucrative it can be, and especially when it encourages government or local people to see the advantages of conserving areas of land. However, in the Dzhungarian at the present time it is not suitable because corruption in the region means that permits may not be carefully monitored, and government officials have open access to the hunting (source: interviews).

A member of the National Parks board felt that loss of natural prey base through hunting is the most serious problem in the Dzhungarian, but that the frequency of illegal hunting was also beginning to drop, like the other conflicts to snow leopards.

11.5.1 Other predators

The high number of wolves may reducing the number of prey species of snow leopard particularly in the winter such as wild boar, roe and red deer in the lowland forests. There were many reports of high numbers of wolves, and they will be exerting an additional pressure on an already stressed resource.

11.5.2 Prey counts

The lack of large prey tracks in both study area 1 and 2 is of concern. This is thought to be due to previous and present hunting levels. However, there are still ibex present, but not at densities reported in other regions in the Himalaya. Snow leopards also take smaller prey (eg. Marmots, Himalayan snow cock or ground squirrel) but they are insufficient to support it, especially for seasonal prey like marmots that hibernate. Although the prey counts were not considered to be completely accurate, and biased due to having a ex-hunter guide in study area three, it is still thought that this result is a reflection of two factors:

52

a. Disturbance by herders in study area one and two (especially one where counts were close to pastures).

b. Hunting levels: especially thought to be high in study area two which is easily accessible from Jarkent (Panfilov) in the south.

However little to no hunting was reported in study area three, which could have been related to the presence of the ecotourism camp. The area is generally visited less (better restrictions at the foot of the valley) and the road terminates, and doesn’t run onto the border like the other two valleys studied. Lastly, it was thought on the prey counts that disturbance from farmers is reduced where mountain sides are steep, and on south facing slopes where grazing is poor for domestic stock. Here ibex and argali tracks were more apparent, in their suited habitat.

11.6 Non selective killing (traps and poison) and trapping and killing for trade

It was extremely difficult to gauge the amount of illegal poaching. No information was found on non-selective killing (traps and poison). The section above outlines the support from previous studies that post-soviet break up there was a huge escalation in poaching and the black market opened up when corruption became rife in Kazakhstan and other Central Asian states (Theile 2003). However, an official of the National Parks board feels ‘these problems are in the past’. The overgrazing and disturbance problems have already been shown to be a problem from Soviet times, much lessened now. Direct hunting of snow leopards, in the opinion of the National Parks board, is a problem that is not as significant as previously. This is said by National Park officials to be due to improving protection of the Dzhungaria, which is evident, but far from sufficient. This could be the case, but even if direct poaching of snow leopards has been reduced, the loss of even a few individuals from such a small population could be devastating. Smuggling across borders especially to China was rife, and it is unlikely that this was an exception in the Dzhungarian range. In neighbouring Kyrgyzstan it was corruption and unemployment that turned the country into a black market and made poaching and mediation in the sale of goods the only source of income for many inhabitants (Koshkarev and Vyrypaev 2000).

Koshakarev (2000b) also states that Kazakhstan’s position in the centre of Central Asia is creating negative pressure on endangered species: the border with China is wide open offering chances of illegal export of animals for Chinese traditional medicines. The Dzhungarian Mountains are split by the Chinese: Kazakh border, and the trade for snow leopard bones (not just pelts for decoration) for Chinese medicine is thought to have had its effect in all reports reviewed (for more on Chinese uses for snow leopard products see Theile 2003). All that could be distinguished by the expedition is that there is still a network of hunters around the mountains, and within the cities, and offers of snow leopard skins within taxis around this region suggests that the market is still thriving.

Koshkarev (2000) suggests that the primary reason for illegal hunting in 1993-1994 is the poverty of local people. This is no longer thought to be the major reason for hunting prey species (traditional reasons is) but would be the main reason for poaching snow leopards. Prices given for snow leopard skins varied, but were extremely high compared to for example Mongolian prices of US$500-800 in a market. Yamaguchi (2001) reports of prices of US$10000 in Kazakhstan. This was supported by this work, with prices of up to US$25000, but more realistically US$10000-15000.

53

11.7 Attitudes towards wildlife and the protected area

Much of the data presented in the results must be considered critically due to the small sample size of the herder’s interviews. However, the perception interview sample size was larger (n=70). The data is self-explanatory, and possible reasons for certain perceptions are given in the results. The main point to be taken from this attitude survey is that the Kazakh herders living in the area do not form a route of conflict through hunting. However, there is still the possibility that the full truth was not given, as one or two interviews suggested that ‘a shepherd’ carries out the hunting in a certain region. Snow leopards have a lower score on the preference ranking than expected, but this could be confounded by people being indifferent to snow leopards, and giving it the rank of 3. However, unlike other countries (Nepal, India) where the local people’s attitudes towards snow leopards affect their behaviour towards snow leopards, it is unlikely that this is the case in Kazakhstan due to the low number of sightings and lack of snow leopard-livestock interactions in the region. Generally, people viewed the protected governmental reserve in a good light, and there was a surprising number of non-use values associated with attitudes towards the protected area (like animals for their beauty and symbolism). This could have been affected by our presence as biologists, and the fact that it was against the law to hunt in the region, previously discussed in the interview. This is especially good if a National Park is to be implemented in the northern region of the study area, meaning it will most likely be viewed positively by the Kazakh herding ‘community’.

When other uses of wildlife were mentioned, however, a greater number of use values and fewer existence values were forthcoming. This is thought to be the difference between use of wildlife (high utilitarian responses) and benefit of the protected area, which isn’t automatically associated with high animal numbers. Many of the Utilitarian uses of wildlife including medicinal uses appear to remain as myth within the Kazakh herders, and are not practiced, especially due to the low number of wild animals. However, the Chinese still practice many of these beliefs.

11.8 Ecological Rangers

As mentioned above following the USSR collapse, ecological rangers were unpaid and, therefore, had no incentive to protect local parks. Now the National parks and Parks board are running again throughout Kazakhstan there has been a marked increase in the number of ecological rangers (Institute of Zoology, pers.comm). However, the rangers met and interviewed tended to be under-provisioned and felt that they were too widely spread to be effective. Two ecological rangers who refused interview were said to be corrupt and offered fake ecological passes for a small fee to the expedition team. It also occurred on one occasion that known hunters sat around the same fire as ecological rangers. However, in the towns and cities order is cohered to, but in contrast in the villages and rural areas bad-practice is common place. The two sectors, rural and urban, should not be mistaken and the divide of practice and corruption needs to be bridged. The introduction of a monetary reward for catching poachers could be extremely effective as an incentive, and rangers are now being provided with clothing and weapons on a annual basis. These incentives are required to ensure rangers are not forced to consider, or allow, poaching (Koshkarev and Vyrypaev 2000). The number of workers in the Institute of Zoology has dropped during the last 8 years from 400 people to 100 due to lack of funding. In spite of this the scientists are enthusiastic and exceptionally hard working. It is hoped this is a temporary drop, and the government invests more in the department.

54

11.9 Summary

Loss of natural prey base can lead to increased livestock-snow leopard interactions, but this does not appear to be the case here in the Dzhungaria. This is most likely because the number of snow leopards has been reduced to a very low number by direct poaching of snow leopards among other factors. Therefore it is questionable whether prey numbers can be truly limiting if the population of snow leopards is so low. Evidence from the present survey does not show whether poaching of snow leopards is continuing or whether the population size is changing. Either way the main threat identified here is poaching of prey species. However, were direct hunting of snow leopards to be occurring, this is likely to have a greater effect on the snow leopard population, considering the low number of individuals.

55

12. DISSEMINATION

12.1 Present threats to snow leopard: Ranking conflicts

Due to the low number of snow leopards in the Dzhungarian range any losses, even a few individuals, could be disastrous to the population. The main threats to snow leopards outlined below were considered with this in mind. With reference to our results it is possible to rank the threats that exist in the western tip of the Dzhungarian Mountains towards snow leopards. This has been done without any form of statistical analysis but by collating all of our results and displaying what the expedition team feel are the most serious threats:

Highest level of threat Loss of snow leopard prey predominantly through hunting

Direct hunting of snow leopard for pelt/medicines

Disturbance

Habitat fragmentation

Overgrazing Lowest level of threat

Direct hunting of snow leopard is written in italics because not enough information was gathered on this to be sure about the level of threat. However, if it is near the level reported in previous Central Asian studies (and a network of hunters was found to exist around the mountains) this is a serious threat to snow leopards. Retaliatory killings of snow leopard by farmers does not feature.

12.2 Root causes of conflict

Previous causes of conflicts have been mentioned already, and the conflicts themselves have been ranked. The root causes of conflicts to snow leopards in the Dzhungarian Mountains can thus be summarised:

¶ Over hunting of natural prey o Traditional role of hunting in society o Lack of effective protection in the Mountain region itself o Corruption between and within stakeholders (officials, military and local) o Legal hunting still authorised in the region: no time allowed for animals

populations to recover ¶ Direct poaching of snow leopard

o Lack of effective protection in the Mountain region o Demand for medicines/pelts still high o Proximity of range to the Chinese border o Local economic impoverishment, ‘hangover’ from Soviet times o Local corruption

¶ Disturbance o Local herding practices wide ranging: herding on the increase

¶ Habitat fragmentation

56

o Local development and improved roads

The last two sections are in italics due to their negligible impact on snow leopards in this region. Previous reduction of snow leopards and wild prey numbers means the effect of any of the above conflicts is exacerbated. Factors that cannot be changed, such as local climate, and the mountains geographical position, have been left out at this point.

12.3 Dispelling Conflicts

For a comprehensive and recent review of recommendations for reducing human-snow leopard conflicts the reader is referred to the final section of Theile (2003), a TRAFFIC report. This report spans threats to conflict throughout the snow leopards range. The main recommendations to reduce snow leopard human conflicts given are:

¶ Strengthening law enforcement capacity ¶ Strengthening national legislation and conservation policies ¶ Protecting livestock from snow leopard predation ¶ Protecting an/or recovering the natural prey base of snow leopards ¶ Providing human communities living locally to snow leopards with economic

incentives for their conservation ¶ Minimizing non-targeted killings of snow leopards ¶ Raising awareness of threats to snow leopards

Below are some possible measures that need to be taken to prevent further conflicts between man and snow leopards in the Dzhungarian Mountain range. As in the ranking of conflicts, the low population of snow leopards has been taken into account here so that immediate action can be taken. Long term conflict resolution may take a different form.

Of the above categories, protecting livestock from snow leopard predation and minimizing non-targeted killings of snow leopards will not be mentioned, as neither are thought to occur in the Dzhungaria, although the uncertainty of direct hunting of snow leopards and methods used has already been mentioned.

57

13. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION AROUND AND WITHIN THE DZHUNGARIA

13.1 Strengthening law enforcement capacity

This category is thought in the short term, due to the low population density of snow leopards recorded, to be the most important immediate way of mitigating present conflicts between snow leopards and people. Increased law enforcement includes preventing hunting of snow leopards and snow leopard prey. It might also include the reduction of legal hunting. This is necessary as despite the large areas of the Dzhungaria that are presently protected, or will be in the future, they are merely ‘paper parks’ at the moment, with insufficient (but improving) protection. Some of the following steps (some taken from Theile 2003) should be made:

¶ Increasing the number of ecological rangers in the regions around the Dzhungaria and equipping them better.

¶ Increasing incentives for rangers to stop poaching ¶ Greater involvement by National park officers and ecological rangers with other

stakeholders in the area including the local military ¶ Strengthen trade controls on known trade routes, at markets and cross border points.

This is especially true of the border at the east end of the Koksu river valley. The road is patrolled by military but it is necessary to have independent patrols in this region, specifically for wildlife protection purposes

¶ Establish anti-poaching teams: To work in the study area 1 and 2, and work with local farmers and communities, who both want the poaching levels to decrease. These teams could be made up of ecological rangers and military soldiers.

¶ Regular monitoring of major markets and known trade centres: This is thought to be being done to some extent, but since the mid-1990’s much trade is completely underground and difficult to monitor

¶ Technical enforcement assistance: Support from NGO’s, CITES for technical support: hands on training for personnel, and research into snow leopard numbers (below). More involvement by snow leopard NGO’s is encouraged in Kazakhstan, to maintain the countries snow leopard population.

13.1.1 Protected Status of the Jungar Mountains (and improving law enforcement)

Two new National Parks are proposed for the Dzhungaria range as soon as 2005 (source: Assistant head of National Parks Department in Taldy-Kurgan). The parks potential coverage is shown in Map II although the exact boundaries are not yet decided. Although the two parks will be joined as one park, they are governed by two different district offices, so there is a purely bureaucratic split, not geographical. This is excellent news for snow leopard conservation in Kazakhstan, showing the Dzhungaria to have been recognised as an important mountain region to conserve, and therefore its status and subsequent protection are to be promoted. There are issues concerning the herders who graze livestock during the summers in the region, as most of these areas could become prohibited for grazing. The new National Park will cover the northern half of the western end of the Dzhungaria (the northern half of the expeditions study area Map II).The southern half of the study area is already afforded some kind of protection by its status as a Governmental reserve. Hopefully during 2005 the whole of the mountainous region of the western tip of the Dzhungaria will be given some form of legal protection. It was felt by the expedition team that there was a lack of communication and understanding between districts in the Almaty Oblast region. For example, rangers of Taldy-Kurgan had little idea of what was occurring within Kapal in relation to ecological rangers and other matters, a town only 60km east. It was also felt that there was a lack of geographical consistency between the current government reserves, and proposed National Parks. Much of this was due to district centres in towns controlling that district, and therefore the reserve was split. The overall map of protected areas looks extremely disjointed at this

58

stage and it is hoped that the formation of the new National Park will bring these areas together

Whether or not the new National Parks will take into account seasonal animal migration or not is unknown, but certainly the current governmental reserve in the southern half of the study area covers only the mountainous areas. It does not cover the lower (around 2400m and below) altitudes where red deer, ibex, mountain sheep and reportedly snow leopard (Annenkov 1990, local farmer reports 2004) drop down to during the winter. The Altynemel-Koyandytau mountains (mountains to the south of study area 2), where snow leopard and ibex sightings are most common in winter (also due to the mountains proximity to habitations) have no protection, and nor do the pastures between the Dzhungaria and these mountains (Map I). It is thought that many of the animals drop to these mountains and pastures in the winter, a move exacerbated by the regions (especially the Koksu river valley) heavy snow fall which moves most animals out of the Dzhungaria. However, when this issue was discussed with the National Parks department, it was clear that too many people were living in these lower regions to extend the park boundaries, confirming that snow leopard prey animals are suffering from range restriction during winter periods. On the other hand it was also stated that the territories into which animals migrate to in the winter are still guarded by the ecological rangers, who live in these areas during the winter.

Despite this it must be said that immense progress made by the rangers and National Parks department in this region of Kazakhstan. The future of wildlife conservation and the possibilities of realising the potential of the Dzhungarian Range exceedthe initial expectations of the expedition team.

13.1.2 Accurate snow leopard monitoring

Snow leopard population data in Kazakhstan has been collected predominantly by Annenkov, of the Institute of Zoology. There are no doubt more reports of snow leopard numbers in the Dzhungaria than those reported in Figure 4 in the results. These counts need to be standardised to improve their accuracy.

13.1.3 Trans-boundary protection

Because many of the prey animals drop out of the mountains during the winter, so do the snow leopards, exposing those to human settlements, especially in the western areas. This fact, combined with dubious relationship between Kazakh and Chinese military all along the border, down the middle of the range, suggests the need for stronger cross border legislation. The areas on the south side of the Dzhungarian range in China are heavily populated, and it is feasible that similar conflicts are occurring there, especially due to the demand for eastern medicines. It is not known what protection status the range has within China, but it is feasible that any conservation efforts on the Kazakh side could be wasted if these efforts are not mirrored on the Chinese side.

13.2 Strengthening national legislation and conservation policies

It is known that there are strict laws about hunting certain species, especially snow leopards, and the Kazakh Ministry of Environment and Bioresources with the Institute of Zoology and National Park Boards throughout the country have an efficient legislation system and sufficient penalties. However, one possible avenue of dispelling conflict could be the introduction of ‘Whistle blower policies’, which provide incentives to report illegal activities (eg. possession/killing of endangered animals). However, due to levels of corruption in the country currently these schemes may be of limited use, but could certainly play a role especially in the villages around the mountains where game is brought from the hunt.

59

13.3 Providing human communities living locally to snow leopards with economic incentives for their conservation

Too little is known about the land tenure rights in the Dzhungaria region, and indeed Kazakhstan, to comment too deeply on this matter. However, it is apparent that local farmers do not require economic incentives for snow leopard conservation (although this could be different if leopards took many of the livestock from farmers). Therefore, income generating schemes and livestock insurance schemes will not play a role here (but may do with bears and wolves). For snow leopard conservation, because local farmers are not causing high levels of conflict, such schemes do not yet have a role in the Dzhungaria (but could do in the future if farmer numbers continue to increase). In some local people have been empowered to look after the land, and to take charge of snow leopard conservation. From the extremely positive results of the community attitude surveys, this would certainly be an alternative (especially if it promoted having less livestock on the grazing areas). However, the Kazakh farmers rent the land from the government, and local empowerment doesn’t seem like a plausible option presently, although it would be an excellent alternative, benefiting those farmers whose livelihoods are linked with the mountains, and the snow leopard population.

In many of the interviews an expression of dislike was portrayed towards the ‘city folk’ who are coming in and killing wildlife in the region indiscriminately (from the farmers point of view, although the National Park board insisted there were regulations). It seems in this case that the Kazakhs of the region would be better protectorates of the area than local or city officials. This would be advised for the future, and could involve small scale ecotourism as well. However, it is possible to draw a divide between the herders (trans-humance pastoralists) and local people living in the foothills of the mountains. It is apparent that local people (not Kazakh farmers), especially those who are carrying out illegal hunting, could be prevented from hunting in ways other than increased law enforcement as shown above. Ecotourism is mentioned below as an alternative source of income to hunting trophies/illegal animal products. Although it has been formally mentioned in the report that hunting is predominantly for traditional reasons, there is little doubt that increased income would prevent at least some hunting. Community based trophy hunting is another option other than ecotourism for providing income into the local region. Presently hunting is controlled by large companies based in Almaty competing for the foreign market, which is extremely lucrative. Clever conservation planning would involve the hiring of more local people for these outfits, or , having local communities set up, and have rights to the trophy hunting itself. However, at present levels of prey in the area this could be a strategy of the future, as schemes may require too much off take to be at all profitable in the first place, encouraging over-exploitation. Ecotourism is presently thought to be the favourable of the two options for providing local employment, so is mentioned below.

13.3.1 Role of Ecotourism

Tourism in Kazakhstan has been chaotic for the last 10 years although in 1999 tourism contributed 8% to the total economic export goods (Glukhovstev 2001). Ecotourism is now considered as one of the priority sectors of the economy. The tourism sector is therefore being addressed, although there is no state policy on tourism and certification is required. Nature based tourism is the most popular form of tourism in Kazakhstan. This definition includes all outdoor activities, and wildlife tourism. For more on tourism in Kazakhstan the reader is referred to the report by Glukhovstev (2001). The report highlights the awareness that ecotourism in certain areas needs to be controlled to minimize its negative impacts, although ecotourism in its true sense is ‘ecologically sustainable tourism’. The World Tade Organisation (WTO) meeting in 2001, “Ecological tourism – an instrument of stable development in 21st century for transition economies of CIS, China and Mongolia” stressed in its final report that Kazakhstan can be considered as an ‘emerging market, which holds a great promise for ecotourism development. The relatively undeveloped and/or

60

unexploited areas possess a rich natural diversity and a unique cultural and historical heritage which can provide a solid base for the internationally growing ecotourism activity’. The expedition group agrees with this conclusion. The expedition spent 5 days based at an old hunter’s camp in the north of the study area (see registered camp later in report) in the Kora river valley. Prey counts were carried out from this camp on the plateaus surrounding the area. The owner, Sagurov Dmitrii Petrovich, used to lead hunting from the camp (ibex hunting). However, he now advertises for tourists from central Asia and Europe/USA to visit his camp for photographic safaris and hiking. He employs over 8 staff, and a guide who used to be a hunter in the region. He has good local contacts in the region, and has managed to stop most illegal hunting in the region so that there can be more animals for tourists to see. It is apparent that this ecologically low impact camp is having a positive impact on the wildlife in the area. There is scope for similar camps within the mountains, which would hopefully serve the same purpose. There is also scope for these camps to serve as research bases for scientists. More on this camp is shown below.

13.4 Raising awareness of the threats to snow leopards

This can be done in three major categories by local NGO’s and government environmental offices:

o Local communities: especially local communities close to the mountains o Potential consumers: ‘buyer bewares’ posters and brochures for potential buyers of

snow leopard and other products. It is difficult to know where or who to target, but tourists, military personnel and business travellers should all be well informed. In this category foreign hunters must also be better informed about the state of the Mountain region they are visiting to hunt in: it is possibly not a major consideration when hunting what the local prey number and other conservation concerns are, mainly because hunters are not well informed on, or before their trip. Most trophy hunters are environmentally friendly and conservationists themselves, but musty be given the information to make informed choices about where to hunt (and possibly in the future with which companies).

o Governments in range states: Promotion by governments of education programmes throughout the country of the importance of snow leopards, and current threats. Governments should be well informed about snow leopard threats and feasible education tools, possibly by International Non-Governmental Organisations.

There is the possible danger of the above education schemes that snow leopard poaching is going to be advertised, and that this will encourage it, and show where current snow leopard ranges are. It is not possible with the level of information the expedition team has, and our experience, to advise on this particular matter.

61

13.5 Conclusion: Summary of Recommendations

¶ More ecological rangers in the region ¶ Greater incentives to rangers to prevent poaching ¶ More effective communication between districts/ranger offices ¶ Involvement of all stakeholders, especially military to prevent cross-border trade ¶ Whistle blower policies ¶ Empowerment of local herders to prevent over hunting and aid with animal

monitoring ¶ More government funding for the Institute of Zoology ¶ More geographic consistency between present and proposed protected areas in the

region ¶ Stronger cross border legislation implementation ¶ Accurate snow leopard monitoring to build on valuable information previously

collected in Kazakhstan ¶ Provision of local incentives (ecotourism and community based hunting reserves)

to reduce local hunting and local unemployment around the mountains ¶ Increased interest in Kazakhstan from conservation International Non-

Governmental Organisations

62

14. SCIENTIFIC CONCLUSION

Previous reports from Kazakhstan emphasising the serious consequences for wild animal

populations due to the Soviet break up were strongly supported in the western region of the

Dzhungaria range. The root causes of these conflicts were unemployment due to cancellation

of state wage and break-up of collective farmers and cooperatives in rural areas, coupled

with a loss of governmental infrastructure to control the black market and widespread

corruption. New international borders and a rise in the demand for Chinese medicines also

contributed.

This study in 2004 in the Dzhungaria, 13 years after the Soviet break up, highlights

the low population of snow leopards in the Dzhungaria, which could be showing signs of

recovery. The work supports reports from Central Asian states that herder-snow leopard

conflicts are not a major threat to snow leopards, but that hunting of snow leopards and loss

of natural prey base are (McCarthy and Chapron 2003). The local farmers were not

highlighted as major actors in any of the conflicts, although the disturbance of pasture

systems undoubtedly has an effect on snow leopard prey. Local farmer attitudes were

favourable towards the protected area and prey animals. Loss of natural prey base through

over-hunting in this region has been highlighted as the major form of threat to snow leopards.

This hunting is exasperated due to the low number of prey in the region due to post 1991

hunting, the poor climatic conditions in the west of the range, and human habitation within

prey wintering grounds.

Much work by National Parks board, the Institute of Zoology and ecological rangers

is thought to be curbing the conflicts of the past. However, the protection of the Dzhungaria

range is far from complete, and more rangers and more efficient practices to stop poaching

need to be employed. In such a vast mountain range it is impossible to police the whole area,

so alternative incentives for those who are presently hunting, for example ecotourism, could

offset current hunting levels, and legal hunting itself needs to be more accountable.

There is scope for further research to determine exact densities of snow leopards,

something which is also being carried out by the Institute of Zoology, but is desperately short

of funding. However, it is thought that more important is to take into account some of the

recommendations for dispelling the conflicts within the immediate future and conservation

NGO’s are urged to work with Kazakh authorities in this process.

‘The people of Kazakhstan are in a unique position to show the world their commitment to the beautiful symbol of their land found in their ancient artwork and

petroglyphs: the snow leopard of the Tien Shan mountains’. -Koshkarev 2000

63

15. EXPLORATION IN THE DZHUNGARIA

Although the expeditions aim was primarily scientific, with a focus on snow leopard conservation, a secondary aim was to explore and photograph some of the remote valleys within the Dzhungarian range. The range is little visited by the Western world, and the wilder areas are only used by hunters and herders. The higher regions of the mountains are not visited at all. The Kazakh herders had not seen many foreigners before on the pastures, and those previously were hunters. Those who had stated it was a nice change to see foreigners who were visiting for interest, and not for shooting purposes. The western tip of the range was visited due to the high number of herders in the area. However, further east along the range there are fewer people, and more scope for exploration. That said, the team spent several days trekking in the surrounding mountains. There was a tight schedule, due to logistical difficulties, so the team would attempt one day walks although a couple of nights were pent out on the tops. Waking early was the best way to get up the slopes before the afternoon heat affected the teams walking ability. We reached around 3600m at our highest point and walked deep into several mountain bowls and up to glaciers.

Mike up on one of the glaciers at around 3200m The most remote areas were on the east of the Kora river valley (study area 3), east of the ecotourism camp. The river is not crossable further east and so the deeper mountains can only be reached by trekking. However, the team did use a wire pulley to cross the river at one point to walk up to some of the surrounding glaciers.

Rich on river crossing on wire pulley The Dzhungaria is an extremely remote area: a great privilege to be exploring some of the mountains secrets.

View of the Kora river valley: Study area 3

64

16. ADMINISTRATION AND LOGISTICS

16.1 Equipment Report

Specialised equipment

1 Garmin E-trek® Global Positioning System (GPS) 1 Satellite Phone rented from Kan Tengri Tour company

Group Equipment

4x 2-man tents 2 multi fuel Stoves 1 pan set plus one large aluminium pot for open fires. Cooking utensils 6 Nomad UK stalking fleeces (see below) Stationary - paper, pens, pencils and water proof folders. Gifts for children - wax crayons, balloons and confectionary. Pac-safe bag with pad lock closure for valuables Comprehensive first aid kit and smaller survival packs (see medical report) 2 pairs of Binoculars Maps Fold away shovel 2 large sealed plastic barrels for food and waste 5ltr water container

Essential personal equipment

Three season sleeping Bag (comfortable to - 6ǓC)Sleeping mat Rucksack 75 litres min Day pack 25 litres min Waterproof jacket, pants and gators. Three season hiking boots and sandals Dry-bags or rucksack liner Plastic survival bag Two complete changes of light weight, quick drying clothes plus gloves, beanie, sunhat, sunglasses and thermal base layers. 1 or 2ltr water container. Lightweight quick drying travel towel Biodegradable soap Sun block and after-sun moisturiser Swiss Army knife or similar Discreet money and document pouch. Lighters and matches Camera Compass

Equipment Problems encountered

The only notable problems encountered with equipment were with the GPS and MSR stoves. The former failed to work after it overheated when left in the tent for the day. The MSR multi fuel stoves worked throughout the trip but we believe either dirty petrol, stale petrol or a combination of the two meant that the stoves were not completely efficient and required constant adjusting to maintain simmering. The performance of the stoves meant that

65

cooking in a pan any larger than those that MSR supply was a patience test. As a result, when camping below the tree line, all cooking was done on an open fire.

MSR have since advised us that pre-filtering the fuel and using freshly pumped fuel rather than petrol that had been stored in a container for some time may have made a difference. The ideal solution would have been to use a white fuel, of which unfortunately we could not find a supplier. The lightweight design of the tents was superb for transportation purposes but several prolonged stays of over two weeks highlighted the low durability of the groundsheet and small rips appeared as a consequence.

16.2 Nomad UK Fleeces

The stalking fleeces provided to us by Nomad UK were a pleasure to test. The heavy weight fleece was warm and the inner shell layer meant the garments were windproof as well as water resistant. Having the shell as a lining instead of an outer layer eliminated rustle and this combined with the dark green colour made the fleece discreet enough to be an effective stalking jacket. The jacket appeared to be cryptic enough to fool all wildlife except the snow leopard which apparently could see us coming a mile off! The only slight complaint for our needs was that the fleece did not pack down particularly small. On the flip-side however they doubled as excellent pillows.

For more information on these fleeces please see http://www.nomaduk.com/

Expedition Team with NOMADUK Fleeces: Mike, Asset, Zhondos, Rich, Morgan and Susie

16.3 Research materials and communication

See equipment list for the expeditions other equipment. Research material was limited to pencils and paper for recording the interviews on and no more. A Dictaphone was decided against as the Kazakhs were happy with us writing information down. A Satellite phone was rented in Kazakhstan. The phone was purely for emergencies. The contact number for Kan Tengeri was always kept with the phone, and numbers of the Kan Tengeri employees were kept in case of emergencies outside of office hours. Phone cards were used in Tekeli and Taldy-Kurgan to keep in contact with Kan Tengeri in Almaty, and the students parents. Email was available in Taldy-Kurgan only, which was used to keep in touch with host-country contacts and family during the times in the town.

16.4 Permissions

The expedition required tourist Visas to enter Kazakhstan (which cover for research and expeditions) .These were applied for through the Kazakhstan Embassy in London. If you are travelling to Kazakhstan for over two months a letter of invitation is required from Kazakhstan, which was obtained from Kan Tengeri Mountaineering Company. It is worth noting that if you intend to enter Kazakhstan several times an HIV certificate must be obtained and presented to the country.

66

In Kazakhstan the VISA must then be registered (which was done for 15$ by Kan Tengeri) with the business or organization that the invitation letter was obtained from. The British Consulate was also visited to show the VISA and tell them of our travel plans. Permits to the Dzhungaria itself are extremely important. Two types of permits are required:

¶ Ecological permit- from the Ecological Rangers office in Taldy-Kurgan (simple form stating that you will not cause any serious impact to the mountain environment)

¶ Border permit- The whole range lies in a border area, and permits need to be obtained, and they will allow one to go within 3km of the border itself. What is required on these permits is a stamp from the immigration office in Almaty to show the individual is formally registered to come to this area. This stamp goes on a letter (which was from Kan Tengeri but could be made by the expedition team) stating the trekking plan, or other purpose of the trip. In addition to the immigration stamp a stamp from the ‘Border Guard Police’ is required, who are based in Almaty. Attached to this letter with the two stamps must be a proposed route map. Then the ‘permit’ is complete, and can be shown to military officaials, or other local officials in the local area. Good luck!

16.5 Safety and training

The medical officer was in charge of health and safety on the expedition. The risk assessment and crisis management has more information on this section. Prior to leaving the expedition leader undertook a Mountain leadership course in Kintail to revise navigation techniques and other mountain skills. Richard practiced with the camera prior to leaving, and Morgan assembled the medical kit. Susie, the teams non-biologist, got some practice with binoculars on the north coast of Scotland.

Abseil training in Kintail during the week long Mountain leadership course

16.6 Medical Arrangements

Morgan Riley was designated Medical Officer for the expedition. He attended the RGS Wilderness Medical weekend and holds the St. John Ambulance First Aid Plus qualification. He has been Medical Officer on previous expeditions.

The team maintained a comprehensive medical kit at each base camp (see appendix) which included sterile surgical equipment to be handed over to qualified medical personal in case of hospitalisation. In addition the team always carried two ‘grab bags’ (see appendix) when away from the base camp which could be used to provide first aid and sustain a casualty whilst awaiting evacuation. The team carried a satellite phone and global positioning system

67

so emergency evacuation could be instantly arranged if necessary. The medical facilities in Kazakhstan’s towns and cities are of a similar standard to those in Europe.

The team were all inoculated as advised by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office prior to departure. No other preventative medicines were necessary. General health was maintained by ensuring at least three hot meals were provided each day, fluids were regularly taken and rest days were established to prevent exhaustion.

At various times different team members were affected by gastro-intestinal infections. After a maximum of a few days rest and the provision of dehydration fluids all team members recovered. In an attempt to avoid such illnesses the water was treated as described above and two bowls of disinfectant mixed with water were provided- one to wash hands in by the lavatory and one to rinse hands and utensils in prior to eating.

Acute Mountain Sickness was a potential hazard as most field work took place above 2500m. It was avoided by allowing acclimatisation and slowly ascending. Camp was always set below the maximum altitude reached that day and there were frequent rest days.

Horse flies and other flies were a nuisance around camp, and caused some localised reaction from bites in some members.

Horse fly bites caused irritation at some points

The only potentially serious accident to occur was when one team member fell on loose rocks resulting in a minor break to a tooth and grazes to the hands and knees. After the administration of first aid and a days rest the team member was able to continue with the expedition relatively unaffected.

16.7 Crisis Management

In the event of an incident occurring in field, the expedition team will activate its Crisis Management Plan. The team will use its satellite phone to contact Tekeli, the nearest large urban area. From Tekeli a four by four will come to meet the team at the nearest road juncture. If the accident is of a more serious nature the teams insurance provides for a helicopter to be sent out from Almaty. If this is necessary we will contact Almaty(Institute of Zoology and Tethys NGO) using the teams satellite phone. These contacts will be arranged in Almaty and Tekeli before the team go into the field. The helicopter will meet the team and casualty at a pre arranged point. The Casualty and one other team member will then be evacuated to the capital to receive treatment. If deemed necessary the casualty will be medi-vacced to a country able to provide a higher quality of health care, or if necessary repatriated. All these eventualities will be covered by insurance for all individuals. In all cases the British embassy will be contacted.

68

In the instance that the satellite phone doesn't work, or is damaged, the team will evacuate to the nearest town and make contact with the group’s contacts in Almaty. The embassy will be aware of the presence of the team throughout their residence in Kazakhstan. In the case of any political civil unrest that would endanger group members the embassy will be able to contact the group via the satellite phone. The possibility of interactions with large carnivores in the region has been considered, and the team will be aware and equipped with flares. A further vulnerable area of safety is transport. When travelling by road an inspection will be made by the expedition leader to ensure the vehicle is safely maintained. If the vehicle fails to be of a satisfactory standard it will be rejected.

16.8 Insurance

The expedition was fortunate in that Newcastle University provides Overseas Travel Insurance Cover without charge to undergraduate and postgraduate students travelling overseas on University business through ACE Europe. The insurance cover included £2,500,000 Medical and Emergency Travel Expenses. The expedition team did not have reason to claim against the insurance policy.

16.9 Risk Assessment

The British Foreign and Commonwealth Office are not aware of any specific threats to British nationals in Kazakhstan. However, we remained in contact with the FCO and were alert to any security related announcements by the Kazakh authorities. The British Embassy in Almaty was notified of our presence and plans. Police can arrest visitors who do not carry identification so the team obtained registration from the local authorities on arrival and carried an Embassy-certified copy of our passports at all times.

All drinking water was filtered then treated with iodine tinctures and boiled where possible. Climate induced illness for example sunstroke was avoided by wearing appropriate clothing such as wide brimmed hats and sunscreen.

Kazakhstan is home to various species of large carnivore including the snow leopard, lynx, brown and tien shan bear. Although most large mammals avoid interaction with humans some safety measures were taken. When camping food and rubbish was stored away from the tents. When selecting a camping area, consideration was placed on being away from animal and walking trails, signs of animal activity and the sounds of rushing water. Flashlights were used when moving around at night to avoid unintentional encounters.

The risk of being bitten by both invertebrates and vertebrates was minimised by wearing stout boots and long trousers when walking and by not placing hands anywhere that they can’t be seen for example, using sticks to turn over logs where necessary. Any cuts or skin punctures were treated with povidone-iodine or a similar antiseptic to prevent infection.

In Kazakhstan robberies rarely occur on road and rail transport. The usual precautions were taken when in the country such as avoiding secluded places, not going out at night, never travelling alone and not flaunting expensive items or money. Expedition members avoided travelling in unofficial taxis. When arriving at a new location the team prearranged to meet a host country contact or an agent of our hosts. The risk of being target by criminals was minimised by taking sensible precautions- avoiding isolated streets, not carrying excessive amounts of valuables. In the mountains the team worked to establish a good rapport with neighbouring families, one of the benefits of this was that the friends made would then watch over us and our camp.

Due to limited service infrastructure petrol and water access can be limited outside the main cities. We ensured that sufficient supplies were taken for each intended journey. As with most expeditions the greatest danger facing the team was from road traffic accidents. When travelling by road an inspection was made by the expedition leader to ensure the vehicle is safely maintained. If the vehicle fails to be of a satisfactory standard it was rejected. If using internal or regional flights

69

There are sites in the north of the country which were used by former defence industries where radioactive and toxic residues which pose health risks for humans and animals remain. The region surrounding the Aral Sea has been severely polluted by agrochemical use. The expedition will not be travelling either to or through these areas.

Due to the relative geological youth of the region there were many loose stones and boulders on the mountains. Where possible areas of loose rocks were avoided, where unavoidable the team moved slowly and carefully.

Water was treated as described above. River crossings were avoided wherever possible. When they did occur the team used permanent crossing points and sought advice from professional guides.

16.10 Food and accommodation

All the food consumed on the expedition was either purchased local markets and shops or provided by the local people in the mountains- usually free of charge. The local food was basic but excellent even if some of the dishes were rather heavy on the sheep fat. The choice of food available in the towns was similar to that in the UK including vegetarian protein supplements, pasta and Earl Grey but at much lower prices. The team returned to Taldy-Kurgan every few weeks to resupply.

Water in the towns and cities was treated with purification tablets on local advice. Various brands of bottled water were widely available although were avoided due to the environmental impact of the plastic bottles and the waters strange sweet taste. In the mountains water taken from small glacial streams was drunk untreated but in valleys populated by people and livestock it was either boiled or purified using tablets.

In Almaty the team spent most nights living in KIMEP University’s student accommodation which was basic but cheap. Reasonable hotel prices in the city range from £10 to £30 per night per person. In Taldy-Kurgan hotel prices ranged from £5 to £15 per night per person. In the field the team stayed in light weight tents purchased in the UK.

16.11 Itinerary

Dates Inputs Outputs 12th July Flight to Almaty 12th-20th July Stay In Almaty Met Kazakh students from

KIMPEP university, and members of the Institute of Zoology. Rental equipment picked up and equipment bought for students.

20th July- 10th September Travel (bus) to Taldykurgan and then on to the Mountains.

In field expedition phase. Camping and fieldwork for seven weeks: carried out in 3-2-2 weeks spells coming out of Mountains to Taldykurgan to resupply.

10th September Bus from Taldykurgan to Almaty

10th- 12th September Stay in Almaty. Flight to Heathrow on the 14th.

Return of equipment. Goodbye to students.

70

16.12 Host Country Collaboration and University Involvement

Institute of Zoology The Institute of Zoology in Kazakhstan was contacted prior to the expedition period. Information was transferred about the whereabouts of the best study sites, past research and study sites. The expedition is providing a report to the Institute and is still in contact with Vitaly Kastcheev.

Tethys NGO Professor Kastcheev is a member of Tethys, a nature conservation NGO in Kazakhstan, based in Almaty. The expedition was in contact and plans to organise an exchange of knowledge after the expedition did not fit with the NGO’s timetable but they will receive a copy of the report.

University Involvement Two students (Asset and Zhondos) were both from KIMEP University. The project would not have been a success without the students, who were an integral part of the expedition team. All the students in-field costs were covered and they were paid a small fee equivalent of that of an internship fee in Kazakhstan ($150/month). The international office at KIMEP gave the expedition team information sheets on the University for the use of Newcastle University- for possible future exchanges.

16.13 Registered field centre

The expedition registered a field centre belonging to a local man, Dima, with the Royal Geographical Societies world field centres list (the first in Kazakhstan!). One of the main recommendations of the report to cut down on illegal hunting in the region is to encourage ecotourism, providing local incentives and employment. This camp is well run, efficient and in the most spectacular spot- ideal for further trekking and exploration in the Kora river valley. The camp is present every summer, has camp beds and stoves in the tents, with excellent food, great value and friendly staff. There are also camp shower facilities available. It takes around 4-5 hours to drive up from Tekeli to the camp in a 4x4 and permits are required. The website is http://www.sttek.narod.ru/ , also on the RGS website at http://www.rgs.org/category.php?Page=mainexpeditions .

Ecotourism tented camp from a peak above (dining tent on the left, sleeping tents on the right)

71

16.14 Funding and Budget

Funds secured-

Newcastle Exploration Council £1000

Newcastle University School of Biology £500

Harry Collinson Award £500

Gordon Foundation £1000

Royal Geographical Society £850

North of England Zoological Society (Chester Zoo) £1000

Royal Zoological Society of Scotland (Edinburgh Zoo) £1000

Gilchrist Educational Trust £1200

Albert Reckitt £750

New York Youth Explorers £270

Earth and Space Foundation £270

Newcastle University Agriculture Department £200

Newcastle University Geography Department £200

TOTAL £8990

72

Funds spent: (six people for nine weeks)

Flights £2400

Insurance University insurance

Vaccinations (tick encephalitis, rabies) £350

VISA’s (Visa-£100, tourist company invitation

letter and administration-£100) £200

Border permits £200

Kazakh Student Expenses (travel, equipment, internship fee) £600

Training £200

Expedition Equipment £1500

Tents

Trip camera

Rucksacks, sleeping mats, stoves etc

GPS

Photography costs (slide development, scanning film, batteries for video camera, tapes for

video camera) £150

Satellite Phone Rental £700

Food and accommodation in Almaty and Taldy-Kurgan £700

Meal with KIMEP International Officer and Kazakh Studetns £70

In field expenses (travel within the mountains, food, batteries, communication)

£1000

Gifts £150

Transport (lifts into mountains, travel from town-town) £500

Report writing (pre-exped printing, post-exped reports) £500

and lecturing expenses

Website set-up £30

TOTAL £9250

The expedition was over budget by £260- however, no official personal contribution was paid into the account due to the success in fund raising, so this money was paid by the expedition members. Although the main equipment (tents, sleeping bags and stoves) were purchased by the expedition, other items such as clothing, footwear, diaries, and beverages in Kazakhstan were paid for by individuals. The contribution per person is thought to be between £150-200.

73

16.15 Environmental officer’s report: Environmental Impact Assessment

It was decided that one member of the expedition was appointed to take responsibility for the impact minimization and waste management of the expedition. The environmental officer was able to oversee a group effort in maintaining a high level of impact awareness. The following actions and precautions were adopted as advised by the British Mountaineering Council (BMC), they helped minimise the visual and chemical/physical impacts of our expedition.

Team size

When in the field a small team size has obvious logistical benefits such as transportation and overall expense. Having a total team of just six also helped to minimise the expedition’s impact environmentally. Fewer supplies meant less waste was produced and less individuals’ meant visual impacts such as erosion, destruction of timber for firewood, old fire remains, litter and human waste was kept to a minimum.

High camp in the Kora River valley

Deforestation

It is important to recognize the key environmental issues that are already posing a threat to the area you are working in so that accentuating the problem can be avoided. We found that generally the herders were ecologically aware and had a minimal impact on the surroundings with the only possible exception being deforestation for firewood. This is a serious problem in a lot of mountain areas where the fragile environment finds it difficult to recover. Problems with the stoves meant that for the most part we did have to rely on open fires and it is worth adding that fires are important culturally to the people living in this area. We were sure however, not to damage vegetation & trees and ensured only deadwood was used. A single fire place was used at each base camp to reduce visual impact.

Camp fire in a lowland base camp

74

Waste Management

Burnable waste Food, paper, card, wood etc were all thoroughly burnt on the last day at each base camp. The fire site was then drenched with water and disguised

Non Burnable waste Metals, Glass, plastics and toxic waste such as batteries, petrol and medical waste were kept to a minimum by:

¶ Removing excess packaging from supplies prior to departure for the mountains. Thus reducing the amount we had to carry and the amount of waste produced.

¶ After removal of packaging we packed food into durable plastic bags for separation and protection. These were re-used and also served as containers for any waste taken back with us.

¶ Waste was separated into the types outlined above; this aided removal and disposal. We used good-quality plastic bags and leak-proof barrels to store non-burnable and toxic waste in camp.

¶ When we reached a suitable destination we disposed of our waste responsibly by asking local advice on re-use/recycle /disposal schemes.

Human waste -Toilet Pits

¶ A discreet toilet area was designated and all expedition members were informed of its location. A trench was dug as deep as possible and situated downhill of all camps and away from drinking water sources. Distinct communal drinking water sources were used by all.

¶ A 1 meter long trench rather than a circular pit was dug. This meant that after visiting the latrine each person could cover their waste. This still left room for future visits whilst keeping unpleasant sights and smells to a minimum!

¶ Biodegradable toilet paper was used at all times.

Detergents

A multi-purpose, neutral pH, biodegradable soap was used for washing ourselves and our cooking utensils.

Antibacterial solution, used for sterilization, was disposed of in the toilet pit and care was taken to thoroughly refill the trench before leaving each base camp.

Conclusion

Working as a group we were able by to keep our impact to a satisfactory level. Although members of our international team came from different backgrounds, everybody responded well to the notion of leaving nothing behind but your footprints. Indeed by making the effort to carry all our waste with us the only visual impact we had on the sites in which we stayed appeared to be yellowing grass under the tents and worn paths that connected them and the fire site. For the amount of time we spent in each area lasting chemical and physical impacts were negligible. The people in the area we were working in did not appear to produce much waste and what was produced was buried or burnt. They are people who clearly have much respect for their land. We felt it was doubly important that not only environmentally but

75

for the people living there that their good example of a low impact, sustainable existence was upheld by us and hopefully by future expeditions.

16.16 Photographic report

Two photographers- Mike and Rich, took the expedition photos. Mike used a Canon EOS100 SLR with a 28-80mm and 100-400mm lens. Both Rich and Mike used 100 speed Fujichrome Sensia film which was ideal. Mikes 67mm wide lenses meant that there was always sufficient light for this film speed, although Richs lense caps were not as wide, and so the light was not always adequate. 50 speed Velvia would be ideal but would have only been useful in certain circumstances and is more expensive. Both Rich and Mike felt that a 20 or 24mm wide angle lense would have been extremely useful for the mountain photography. With constant rain it was important to keep cameras in their cases and regular maintenance and cleaning was necessary.

Dzhungarian Alatau (‘Colourful mountains’ in Turkish) in mid September as the colours began to turn

16.17 Video camera report

A Panasonic NV–GS11 digital video camera was used to document the trip. It was compact and light enough not to be too cumbersome and it was suitably robust. With a 24X optical zoom this camera also proved to be a helpful aid to the binoculars on prey count surveys, especially when an animal was too far away for the group to locate easily, the subject could be pointed out on-screen. When using the camera’s zoom to this extent a 1.8m monopod was invaluable to minimise shake. A tripod would also have been a welcome addition to the kit list

The biggest problems encountered were battery supply and dust on the tape heads. Dusty truck rides caused one of the buttons to stick and two tapes to became scratched although both were salvaged to some degree. In addition to the standard one hour battery a two hour extra battery was taken. Because of the length of time we camped away from mains supply an extra battery would have been useful. Recharging was not a problem when staying in the towns. We used a total of twelve 1hr Mini DV tapes including three extra purchased over there.

Apart from filming our activities each day we also kept a video diary. Which every body made an entry to once a week. Primarily this was a worth while bit of fun but has also given us a useful personal account of how the trip went. People we worked with were fascinated by the camera especially when you turn the LCD screen around to face the children and adults for that matter! It was almost certainly the first time they will have seen themselves on screen. The only time we refrained from using it was inside the jurts themselves as it felt too intrusive. We all agreed that a video camera is an essential bit of kit and highly recommend it

76

to anyone who wants to bring their expedition to life, both whilst your in the field and on your return.

16.18 Trip camera

A trip camera was taken by the expedition and placed on ridges and tracks in the mountain and around where the team was camping. Only one photo (below) was taken other than those of herders and ourselves due to the low numbers of wildlife in the region and the availability of only one camera.

Vulture (unidentified) landing on a dead horse in the Koksu river valley

16.19 Logistical Problems Encountered

Obtaining permits for the border regions was a struggle. Initially Kan Tengeri (tourism company in Almaty) were organising the permits while the team was in the UK, but they failed to do so, and offered only a letter of recommendation, but still charged for this. See permissions section for more information on obtaining permits.

Buying food from Kazak herders was problematic and should not be relied on. The first reason is that the expedition team did not want to deplete their summer food stores but offering cash for food, which they may not have enough of with them for the whole summer. The second reason is that the Kazakhs will not accept cash, and will only give away food. This is only a glimpse at their enormous hospitality.

Transport with the military and with locals is sporadic and not to be relied on. Time should be built into expedition’s itinerary for this. Although horses can be used for transport, it is best to contact the herders several days, and even weeks before you want to use the horses as they may be pasturing in the Mountains and will need to be fetched.

16.20 Distribution of full expedition reports Other reports (prelim./certain sections) have been sent out to relevant advisors etc. Institute of Zoology, Kazakhstan National Park Board, Taldy-Kurgan, Kazakhstan Royal Geographical Society North of England Zoological Society (Chester Zoo) Royal Zoological Society of Scotland (Edinburgh Zoo) Newcastle University Exploration Council Gilchrist Educational Trust Albert Rickett Foundation New York Youth Explorers Earth and Space Foundation International Snow Leopard Trust Snow Leopard Conservancy Manchester University (Dr Mallon)

77

16.21 Other expedition outputs

Expedition lectures

19th November- Royal Geographical Society 30th November- Newcastle University 5th January - Royal Zoological Society for Scotland 19th January- Wilderness Lecturers (Bristol) February- Edinburgh University Exploration Club

Registered the first Kazakhstan field centre with the RGS International link with KIMEP University, Almaty, Kazakhstan Video for Geography Educational DVD

16.22 Expedition website

Michael Riddell shares a website with ‘Lyon Images’, which is a non-profit photographic website. Expedition reports from the last three years have been placed on the site. The idea is to display the research on the web for anyone interested in carrying on with futher research, or for those people who want a copy of the expedition report. It is planned that the site will become independent in 2005. The web address is http://www.lyonimages.co.uk/mike.html

17. CONTACTS

In Kazakhstan

Almaty

Vitaly. A.Kastcheev. Institute of Zoology, Department of Entomology, Scientific Society Tethys, Central Asian Zoological Society.

Kaz 480060, Almaty, Academgorodok Tel: (3272) 47-80-36

Chief of Permissions Department of the Border Guards (name undisclosed) Tel: 83007274460

International Officer (KIMEP University) Tel: (3272) 70-42-30 Mobile: 85007124593

British Embassy Emergency Number: 83007112301

Dzhungarian/Taldy- Kurgan

Valery V. Lazurin Director of the Business Centre, Taldy-Kurgan

Box 53, Birzhan Sal Street, 102 Taldy-Kurgan, Kazakhstan, 488000 Tel: (3282) 27-03-30 Fax: (3272) 27-12-34 Mobile: 83332319570 Email: laz@mail.kz

78

Commander of Military Base, Rudnichnee (‘Max’) Tel: 83331113000 Captain at Military Base, Rudnichnee (‘Timau’) Tel: 83332501513

Zhanybek Asskar Director of Taldy-Kurgan KNB Tel: 27-95-88/27-97-28 Mobile: 8328273278

Hudyakov Vyacheslav Terentyevich: Head of Department of State Control of Preserving, Reproduction and Exploitation of the Animal World of Almaty Oblast Region Email: pihta_tkorgan@mail.ruTel: TK (3282) 24-33-73 24-78-86 24-52-88 Mobile: 8-333-283-9823

Tekeli

Poshasova Tamara Sergeevna Head of new tourist firm (organise transport into the mountains)

Translators

Halida Symmnes Tel: 83003382439

In the UK:

Snow Leopard Authorities:

Dr David Mallon, Manchester University. Snow Leopard Network Steering Committee

International Snow Leopard Trust Dr Thomas M. McCarthy, Ph.D.-Conservation Director

Snow Leopard ConservancyRodney Jackson, Ph.D (Director) - Snow Leopard Conservancy leader

Previous Expeditions to Kazakhstan:

Royal Engineers Expedition 2000 (RGS Approved) Stuart Batley and Mick Jenkins- Expedition to the Dzhungarian Alatau range. Mountaineering expedition, mapping peaks in the area south of Sarkand (2000).

Catherine Moorehead- Five previous expedition to Kazakhstan, two to the Dzhungarian Alatau range. Both mountaineering expeditions (1999).

79

18. REFEREE

Dr. Peter Garson, Chairman of Newcastle University Exploration Council, Dept. of Agricultural and Environmental Science, King George VI building, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE1 7RU. Tel: 0191 222 6674/6268 peter.garson@ncl.ac.uk

19. ADVISOR

Ashley Spearing MBioch OXON Member of the Snow leopard Network Affiliated to the International Snow Leopard Trust Oxford University Expedition: Ladakh 2000 (Ref :4096) ashleyspearing@hotmail.com

20. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The most thanks goes to Ashley Spearing who helped with the expedition science, and used his experience to make the expedition a success. Thanks also to Dr David Mallon, Dr Peter Garson, Tom McCarthy and Rodney Jackson for all their inputs into the structure of the work.

Many thanks to Catherine Moorehead who helped with contacts in Kazakhstan and expedition logistics.

Thank you also to Niall Riddell, of lyonimages.co.uk for hosting the expedition website in its early days. To Phil Wright of NOMAD clothing for his kindness in sponsoring us with 6 top quality fleeces, and for his other encouragement.

Thanks you to Vitaly Kastcheev of the Institute of Zoology who was in contact with us for many months before the field-work commenced. Thanks to all the members of KIMEP University who made our stay a pleasurable one.

Lastly, thanks to the Kazakh herders for being so helpful and interested in our project.

80

21. REFERENCES

Annenkov, B.P (1990). The Snow Leopard (Uncia uncia) in the Dzhungarian Alatau. Lm.Ped. Book of the Snow Leopards. 6: 21-24

Braden, K (1994). The Snow Leopard in Independent Kazakhstan. Snowline. 12.

Glukhovstev, I (2001). Integrating biodiversity into the tourist sector. Biodiversity Planning Support Programme. Public centre of conservation of biological diversity in the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Green (1994). Protecting the mountains of Central Asia and their snow leopard populations. Proceedings of the Seventh International Snow Leopard Symposium.

Jackson, P. (1995) The Snow Leopard: A Flagship for Biodiversity in the Mountains of Central Asia. Eighth International Snow Leopard Symposium.

Jackson, R. (1999). Snow Leopards, Local People and Livestock Issues. Cat News. 31. 22-23.

Jackson, R., Ahmad,A (1997). Status and Conservation of Snow leopards in Kazakhstan. Eigth International Snow leopard Symposium.

Jackson,R., Wangchuk,R., and Hillard,D. Grassroots Measures to Protect the Endangered Snow Leopard from Herder Retribution: Lessons Learned from Predator-Proofing Corrals in Ladahh. 2002. ISLT.

Koshkarev., E (2000.a) What Has Happened to the Snow Leopard After the Break-Up of Soviet Union? Snow Line. 16

Koshkarev., E (2000.b) Snow leopard poaching in Central Asia. Snow leopard final report.

Koshkarev, E (2002). Strategy of Snow Leopard Conservation in Russia (and in Boundary Territories of Mongolia, China, and Kazakhstan). Proceedings of the Snow Leopard Survival Summit

Koshkarev, E. and Vyrypaev, V. (2000). The snow leopard after the break-up of the Soviet Union. Cat News 32: 9-11.

McCarthy, T., Chapron, G. (2003). Snow Leopard Survival Strategy. International Snow Leopard Trust and Snow Leopard Network

McCarthy,T. Snow leopard conservation project, Mongolia: WWF Project Summary of Field Work. 1999

Oli-M, Taylor, I.-R., and Rogers, M.-E. (1994a). Snow leopard Panthera unica predation of livestock: An assessment of local perceptions in the Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal." Biological-Conservation. 68, (1) 63-68.

Oli, M (1994b). The ecology and conservation of the snow leopard (Panthera uncia) in the Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Phil.Thesis, University of Edinburgh.

Spearing, A.(2000). Oxford University Expedition: Ladakh 2000. RGS Archives, 4096. Unpublished.

81

Spearing, A. (2002). The Snow Leopard in Zanskar, Jammu and Kashmir, NW India. In: Proceedings of the Snow Leopard Survival Strategy Summit, May 2002, Seattle, USA. International Snow Leopard Trust, Seattle, USA.

Theile, S (2003). Fading footprints: The killing and trade of snow leopards. TRAFFIC International

Yamaguchi, N. (2001). Wild cats in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. Cat News 35: 22-24.

Quatercenterary Expedition to the Dzhungarian Alatau, 1998, Unpublished.

Yuchkenov Y, Katon-Karagay State National Park, in litt., 2002

Kazakh Apogee 2000 Expedition report, Unpublished

Any reports which are unpublished please search the International Snow Leopard Trusts Website for online reports: http://www.snowleopard.org/

82

22. APPENDIXES

Appendix I Herder questionnaire:

Date/time: Area Description: Location/GPS: Livestock belonging to……households Interviewee: Interviewers:

How many people are in your family? Are there more people in this area than before (last 10/20 years)? Do you have any other skills/partake in any other employment? Is the grazing in this area good? Has it changed in the last 10/20 years? Are the any difficulties with livestock farming in this region? If yes can you rank these difficulties? How many livestock do you have? (Separated into sheep/goats/horses/cattle) Has this changed in the last 10/20 years? How many livestock do you loose to natural causes? Do you loose any livestock to predators? If yes- Which predators and how many livestock to each? What time in the season? On pasture/in corral/ on the way up/down to pastures? As above- but were they guarded? How do you attribute certain predators to certain kills? What preventative measures do you have in place to stop snow leopards/large predators predating your livestock? What level of depredation would you consider tolerable/would you tolerate? (Would you ever kill a snow leopard yourself?)- not always asked. Have you seen wild animals in this area?

If yes- Which animals and how many? (rare, common, season) Has the number of wild animals changed since you have been here (last 10/20 years)? Do you see any snow leopard tracks/signs in this area? Have you ever heard of a snow leopard being killed (or any other snow leopard related stories?) Does anyone hunt wild animals here? If yes when, what animals and how many? (Do you hunt or eat wild animals yourself)- not always asked Do you know of any animals that are protected by law in this area? What do you think about the protected status of this area? Can you rank your preference of certain animals (done on paper on a scale of 1-5) Do you see any other uses for snow leopard/wild animals in this region? (What would encourage you to take part in snow leopard conservation?)- not always asked.

83

Appendix III Medical appendix:

Grab bag

Light stick Whistle LighterBivi-bag $200 cash

Safety pin Latex gloves Zinc oxide tape Wet wipes Irrigation solution Assorted plasters Hydrocolloid dressing Melolin dressing No. 18 type dressing Aspirin Ibuprofen

84

Main Medical Kit

Safety pins Sewing needles/thread Latex gloves Zinc oxide tape Wet wipes Irrigation solution Thermometer Scissors Tweezers 2ml syringes 5ml syringes 10ml syringes Green needles Orange needles Medi swabs Scalpel Steristrips Suture 4/0

Assorted plasters Hydrocolloid dressing Hydropolymer adhesive dressing PVP-I Non adherent dressing Melolin dressing Viscose dressing No. 3 type dressings Eye dressing No.16 No. 18 type dressings Triangular bandage Crepe bandage

Ichthopaste Antiseptic cream Canesten cream E45 cream Dry antiseptic spray Rehydration sachets Aspirin Ibuprofen Paracetamol Cetirizine dihydrochlorideLoperamide hydrochlorideTetracycline

85

23. PHOTOGALLERY

A Soviet jeep crosses the Koksu river on the way into the Mountains

The pastures in full flower in July

Base camp on the south of the mountains

An ‘informal interview’ on the slopes of the pastures

86

A Kazakh girl having just caught a butterfly

The team strides out in one of the Dzhungaria’s remoter areas

A lonely expedition member up on one of the glaciers

87

Kazakh herders take a break in the afternoon sunlight

Kazakh children with the National Flag

Rich takes a moment in the freshness of the mountain morning

A lowland valley in the evening

88

‘The people of Kazakhstan are in a unique position to show the world their commitment to the beautiful symbol of their land found in their ancient artwork and

petroglyphs: the snow leopard of the Tien Shan mountains’. -Koshkarev 2000