Measuring people’s attitude towards conservation of Leopard Panthera pardus (Mammalia: Carnivora) in the foothills of Himalayan region

Le résumé fourni par la source

Measuring people’s attitudes about the large carnivores involved in human-wildlife interface, also termed conflict or interaction, is an essential aspect of developing effective conservation and management planning for human-carnivore coexistence. Human-leopard (Panthera pardus) interaction is widespread and one of the most pressing conservation issues within the global range of leopards. However, there is a scarcity of information on local people’s opinions and attitudes concerning carnivores in human-dominated areas. Our current study focused on understanding the human dimensions of human-leopard interactions in the multi-purpose landscape situated in the foothills of Shiwalik Himalaya, Uttarakhand, India. Between January and May 2022, we conducted a semi-structured questionnaire survey (N = 266) to understand how socio-demographic factors impact the attitudes of local people toward leopard conservation in the Rajaji Tiger Reserve, Uttarakhand, India. Overall, 61.7% of respondents had positive attitudes toward leopards and supported leopard conservation, primarily attributed to the aesthetic value of leopards. Using ordinal logistic regression models, we found that male respondents and individuals with higher education had a positive attitude towards leopard conservation. The majority of respondents who conveyed positive attitudes towards leopard conservation belonged to the more educated socio-demographic groups. As a follow-up, specific studies need to be conducted on local people’s attitude about compensation or compassionate payments, often disbursed as compassionate payments, the response of the forest department to prevailing conflict, and current awareness programs. These can be crucial factors towards shaping the attitude of local respondents and promote human-leopard coexistence.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.