LEOPARD (PANTHERA-PARDUS-CISCAUCASICA) IN ARMENIA - BASIC TRENDS, DANGERS AND HOPES

Authors
Citation
I. Khorozyan, LEOPARD (PANTHERA-PARDUS-CISCAUCASICA) IN ARMENIA - BASIC TRENDS, DANGERS AND HOPES, International journal of sustainable development and world ecology, 5(1), 1998, pp. 1-10
Citations number
29
Categorie Soggetti
Ecology
ISSN journal
13504509
Volume
5
Issue
1
Year of publication
1998
Pages
1 - 10
Database
ISI
SICI code
1350-4509(1998)5:1<1:L(IA-B>2.0.ZU;2-X
Abstract
This article describes ecological, genetic, psychological, juridical a nd economic aspects of the leopard (Panthera pardus ciscaucasica) cons ervation in Armenia. It also suggests certain tools for species preser vation by means of ecotourism and ungulate breeding development and pr ovides an overview of global perils to leopard, namely the cat skin tr ade, sport hunting and eradication by shepherds and livestock breeders . In the shortterm perspective, the current abundance of leopard (25 i ndividuals) ensures the reproduction group size (effective population size) of 15-20 animals and loss of genetic variability (heterozygosity ) at a rate 2.5-3% per generation. Individual range and biomass values are 89.2 km(2) and 0.5 kg/km(2), respectively. If today's trends rema in the same, leopard population in Armenia is likely to run down to ex tinction after approximately 30 generations. These data, however, do n or imply the leopard's early demise as its ability to overcome the pro blem of inbreeding in small populations by adaptability and natural se lection is still unknown. In psychological terms, the leopard has the highest preservation value of intangible characteristics-existence val ue, bequest value, option value and vicarious (recreational) value. Th e juridical and economic backgrounds of the man-leopard conflict are c onfined to the assessment of different views on the illegal killing of leopards by farmers and conservationists. Owners of the domestic anim als attacked by leopards need full reimbursement of material detriment , while wildlife rangers and conservation authorities blame farmers fo r deliberate killing of the predators and punish them without understa nding the reasons which instigate the livestock breeders to commit the misdeed.