COARSE-SCALE POPULATION SURVEYS
Questionnaire Surveys
Due to their resilience in the face of anthropogenic pressure, leopards are often afforded low conservation priority (Balme et al. 2010), yet they have been eradicated from 37% of their historic African range (Ray, Hunter & Zigouris 2005). Limpopo Province comprises the most suitable leopard habitat across South Africa (Swanepoel et al. 2013), but is also a major hotspot for human-mediated leopard mortality (Lindsey et al. 2011). The trade in leopard products, such as trophies and skins for cultural regalia (Hunter, Henschel & Ray 2013), require justification through non-detriment finding assessments undertaken by the South African National Biodiversity Institute (Lindsey et al. 2011). However, assessing the scale and impacts of consumptive utilization of leopards requires current data that are often not available. In addition, provincial conservation authorities require accurate province-wide data on leopard distribution and abundance to enable informed decision-making. To ensure leopard population persistence and sustainable use, effective management is necessary (Balme et al. 2013), but can only be achieved through a landscape-scale understanding of leopard distribution patterns and the factors that underpin the likelihood of occupying an area. Through a scientific partnership with Panthera, questionnaire surveys are conducted on an annual basis in Limpopo Province and KwaZulu-Natal Province (more provinces are to be included in the future) to model leopard occurrence and assess the factors that influence their distribution. These surveys involve a combination of face-to-face and telephonic interviews with landowners and residents. Approximately 1000 people are interviewed per year per province.
Due to their resilience in the face of anthropogenic pressure, leopards are often afforded low conservation priority (Balme et al. 2010), yet they have been eradicated from 37% of their historic African range (Ray, Hunter & Zigouris 2005). Limpopo Province comprises the most suitable leopard habitat across South Africa (Swanepoel et al. 2013), but is also a major hotspot for human-mediated leopard mortality (Lindsey et al. 2011). The trade in leopard products, such as trophies and skins for cultural regalia (Hunter, Henschel & Ray 2013), require justification through non-detriment finding assessments undertaken by the South African National Biodiversity Institute (Lindsey et al. 2011). However, assessing the scale and impacts of consumptive utilization of leopards requires current data that are often not available. In addition, provincial conservation authorities require accurate province-wide data on leopard distribution and abundance to enable informed decision-making. To ensure leopard population persistence and sustainable use, effective management is necessary (Balme et al. 2013), but can only be achieved through a landscape-scale understanding of leopard distribution patterns and the factors that underpin the likelihood of occupying an area. Through a scientific partnership with Panthera, questionnaire surveys are conducted on an annual basis in Limpopo Province and KwaZulu-Natal Province (more provinces are to be included in the future) to model leopard occurrence and assess the factors that influence their distribution. These surveys involve a combination of face-to-face and telephonic interviews with landowners and residents. Approximately 1000 people are interviewed per year per province.
Multi-Season Occupancy Model for Limpopo Province - The map (above) shows sampled areas (square blocks), which are coloured a unique shade of grey to depict the probability of leopard occupancy for 2013-2015. The lighter areas have a lower occupancy probability, therefore leopard are less likely to occupy these areas. This is the result of thousands of questionnaire surveys conducted throughout Limpopo every year.
Harvest Monitoring and Composition
In many developing countries, conservation authorities lack the human and financial resources to accurately and consistently monitor wildlife populations (Daly et al. 2005, Rodríguez et al. 2005), particularly cryptic species such as leopards which range widely and occur mainly outside of formally protected areas (Friedmann and Traylor‐Holzer 2008, Swanepoel et al. 2013). As a result, carnivore management is rarely underpinned by strong science (Ray et al. 2005).
Research on cougars has shown that changes in the population structure of an annual harvest are monotonically related to changes in population abundance (Anderson & Lindzey 2005). Because movement patterns vary predictably among cougar age and sex classes, some cohorts are more exposed to hunting than others. A similar relationship exists among leopards (Braczkowski et al. in prep.). The demographic composition of an annual harvest also provides an indication of the impacts of trophy hunting on population viability. Packer et al. (2009) demonstrated that harvesting male leopards ≥7 years old had little impact on population persistence, regardless of offtake. By this age, males are old enough to have reared at least one offspring to independence, which is sufficient to maintain populations.
Panthera monitors annual leopard mortality at the provincial scale to identify areas that require focused conservation effort resulting from over-exploitation. Panthera uses current and historical trophy hunting and problem-animal-control permit records to identify refugia (i.e., habitats that exhibit relatively high survival but low reproduction) and ecological traps (i.e., high-quality habitat that exhibits reduced reproduction and survival) among leopard populations across South Africa. Catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) is an important management component that relies on the premise that a constant harvesting effort will remove a constant proportion of the population. An increase in the effort required to secure a trophy infers a proportional decrease in population size, and vice versa. CPUE is most commonly applied in fisheries management, but it has also been used to monitor large carnivore populations (Edwards et al. 2014). Our principal unit of effort is the number of days required by hunters to successfully hunt a leopard. However, the success of leopard hunts is also affected by the number of baits deployed by hunters, the frequency that baits are replaced, or whether an area was pre-baited. These data are included in the hunt return form that outfitters are required to submit upon completion of a successful or unsuccessful hunt.
In many developing countries, conservation authorities lack the human and financial resources to accurately and consistently monitor wildlife populations (Daly et al. 2005, Rodríguez et al. 2005), particularly cryptic species such as leopards which range widely and occur mainly outside of formally protected areas (Friedmann and Traylor‐Holzer 2008, Swanepoel et al. 2013). As a result, carnivore management is rarely underpinned by strong science (Ray et al. 2005).
Research on cougars has shown that changes in the population structure of an annual harvest are monotonically related to changes in population abundance (Anderson & Lindzey 2005). Because movement patterns vary predictably among cougar age and sex classes, some cohorts are more exposed to hunting than others. A similar relationship exists among leopards (Braczkowski et al. in prep.). The demographic composition of an annual harvest also provides an indication of the impacts of trophy hunting on population viability. Packer et al. (2009) demonstrated that harvesting male leopards ≥7 years old had little impact on population persistence, regardless of offtake. By this age, males are old enough to have reared at least one offspring to independence, which is sufficient to maintain populations.
Panthera monitors annual leopard mortality at the provincial scale to identify areas that require focused conservation effort resulting from over-exploitation. Panthera uses current and historical trophy hunting and problem-animal-control permit records to identify refugia (i.e., habitats that exhibit relatively high survival but low reproduction) and ecological traps (i.e., high-quality habitat that exhibits reduced reproduction and survival) among leopard populations across South Africa. Catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) is an important management component that relies on the premise that a constant harvesting effort will remove a constant proportion of the population. An increase in the effort required to secure a trophy infers a proportional decrease in population size, and vice versa. CPUE is most commonly applied in fisheries management, but it has also been used to monitor large carnivore populations (Edwards et al. 2014). Our principal unit of effort is the number of days required by hunters to successfully hunt a leopard. However, the success of leopard hunts is also affected by the number of baits deployed by hunters, the frequency that baits are replaced, or whether an area was pre-baited. These data are included in the hunt return form that outfitters are required to submit upon completion of a successful or unsuccessful hunt.
Upload Your Trail-cam Images (UNDER CONSTRUCTION)
By using this website, you can contribute significantly to leopard management and conservation across South Africa. Simply upload your own leopard photos (with GPS co-ordinates) or complete the leopard survey. The data that you provide will be used much like our questionnaire surveys, which will be fed into a larger database that will help us to model leopard management strategies and advise on setting future hunting quotas.
By using this website, you can contribute significantly to leopard management and conservation across South Africa. Simply upload your own leopard photos (with GPS co-ordinates) or complete the leopard survey. The data that you provide will be used much like our questionnaire surveys, which will be fed into a larger database that will help us to model leopard management strategies and advise on setting future hunting quotas.