Leopard Panthera pardus camera trap surveys in the arid environments of northern Namibia

Abstract

In Namibia, leopards (Panthera pardus) are widely distributed, used commercially as trophy animals and are often persecuted for perceived or real predation on livestock and valuable game species outside protected areas. Therefore, leopard populations living in protected areas might be important source populations and for maintaining connectivity. Little data on their population sizes and densities are available from the northern part of the country, particularly from protected areas. Here, we estimated leopard densities using a spatial capture–recapture approach in northern Namibia: (i) the Khaudum National Park (KNP) in north-east Namibia with an annual average rainfall of 450 mm and (ii) the Lower Hoanib River (LHR) in north-west Namibia with an annual average rainfall of 25 mm. With an effort of 2430 and 2074 camera trap nights in the KNP and LHR, respectively, 11 adult female and six adult male leopards were identified in the KNP, whilst only one adult female leopard was detected once in the LHR. For the KNP, a maximum likelihood approach (using the package SECR) revealed a density estimate of 2.74 leopards/100 km2, whereas a Bayesian approach (using the package SPACECAP) revealed a density estimate of 1.83 leopards/100 km2. For the LHR, no density estimate could be determined and it is suggested that the leopard density in such an arid environment is low. These are the first leopard density estimates based on camera trap surveys provided for these protected areas and thus of importance for further monitoring programs to understand leopard population dynamics. We discuss our findings with current habitat changes and conservation measures in both study areas.

Anthropogenic pressure limits the recovery of a postwar leopard population in central Mozambique

“…This leopard density estimate represents one of few from WMAs (i.e., 17 of 161 estimates reviewed), falling among the lower end of densities throughout Africa or Asia and below records in similar mixed forest and seasonal floodplain habitats (e.g., 4.80–8.38, Tembe Elephant Park, South Africa, Ramesh et al, 2017, Rogan et al, 2019; 3.34–7.89, Kafue National Park, Zambia, Vinks et al, 2021). However, this relatively low estimate may be typical of semiarid environments (1.18, Devens et al, 2019; 2.20, Faure et al, 2021; 1.53–1.62, Müller et al, 2022; 1.83, Portas et al, 2022) and human‐impacted landscapes (2.49, Balme et al, 2010; 2.7, Henschel et al, 2011; 1.9, Davis et al, 2020; 0.66, Power et al, 2021; 0.7–1.8, Loveridge et al, 2022). Excluding the extirpation and subsequent reintroduction of leopards into nearby Gorongosa National Park (Easter et al, 2019; Gaynor et al, 2021) and the extremely low densities in Coutada 9 (Lindsey & Bento, 2012), this represents the lowest of only four studies (2.60–5.90, Xonghile/Karingani Game Reserve, Strampelli et al, 2018, Niassa Special Reserve, Jorge, 2012) that have estimated leopard density throughout Mozambique.…”

Individual identification and photographic techniques in mammalian ecological and behavioural research—Part 2: Field studies and applications

“…Conservation practitioners use these parameters along with estimates of population numbers and trends to assess the conservation status of species or local populations. Individual photo-ID lends itself very well to generate such estimates through markrecapture techniques (e.g., Lettink and Armstrong 2003), with several representative studies featured in this Special Issue (Braczkowski et al 2022;Chan et al 2022b, c;Coxon et al 2022;Gabriele et al 2022;Marneweck et al 2022;Morris et al 2022;Portas et al 2022). For such analyses to be reliable, however, photo-ID data must conform to a strict set of assumptions; otherwise, the resultant estimates may be biased if these assumptions are not met.…”