Identifying risk zones and landscape features that affect common leopard depredation

Abstract

Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) is a pressing issue worldwide but varies by species over time and place. One of the most prevalent forms of HWC in the mid-hills of Nepal is human-common-leopard conflict (HLC). Leopard attacks, especially in forested areas, can severely impact villagers and their livestock. Information on HLC in the Gorkha district was scarce, thus making it an ideal location to identify high-risk zones and landscape variables associated with such events. Registered cases were collected and reviewed from the Division Forest Office (DFO) during 2019-2021. Claims from DFO records were confirmed with herders and villagers via eight focus group discussions. To enhance modeling success, researchers identified a total of 163 leopard attack locations on livestock, ensuring a minimum distance of at least 100 meters between locations. Using maximum entropy (MaxEnt) and considering 13 environmental variables, we mapped common leopard attack risk zones. True Skill Statistics (TSS) and area under receiver-operator curve (AUC) were used to evaluate and validate the Output. Furthermore, 10 replications, 1,000 maximum iterations, and 1000 background points were employed during modeling. The average AUC value for the model, which was 0.726 ± 0.021, revealed good accuracy. The model performed well, as indicated by a TSS value of 0.61 ± 0.03. Of the total research area (27.92 km2), about 74% was designated as a low-risk area, 19% as a medium-risk area, and 7% as a high-risk area. Of the 13 environmental variables, distance to water (25.2%) was the most significant predictor of risk, followed by distance to road (16.2%) and elevation (10.7%). According to response curves, the risk of common leopard is highest in the areas between 1.5 to 2 km distances from the water sources, followed by the closest distance from a road and an elevation of 700 to 800 m. Results suggest that managers and local governments should employ intervention strategies immediately to safeguard rural livelihoods in high-risk areas. Improvements include better design of livestock corrals, insurance, and total compensation of livestock losses. Settlements near roads and water sources should improve the design and construction of pens and cages to prevent livestock loss. More studies on the characteristics of victims are suggested to enhance understanding of common leopard attacks, in addition to landscape variables. Such information can be helpful in formulating the best management practices.