1. Screen Shot 2015-11-23 at 4.57.40 PM The Reemergence of the Amur Leopard Alexander Titus, B.S.B.A. Human Resources & B.A. History INTRODUCTION The Amur Leopard (Panthera pardus orientalis) has been listed as critically endangered since 1996 and is the most endangered big cat in the world with about fifty known surviving in the wild. Amur leopards are the northernmost species of Panthera pardus and had relied upon the areas of Northeastern China, southern areas of Southwest Primorye in Russia, and most of the Korean Peninsula until human activity diminished their range to just southwestern Southwest Primorye and the easternmost areas of Jilin Province, China. Forest fires and poaching throughout the 20th century have been the causes of the Amur leopard’s endangered status. Although about two hundred are kept in captivity throughout the world, inbreeding and difficulties keeping cubs alive have both kept Amur leopard numbers dwindling at about fifty in the wild and two hundred in captivity. This poster presents the current efforts at hand in the regions listed to preserve the Amur leopard population in the short-term and to eventually increase it. Although the Amur leopard population has doubled in the Russian Far East since 2007, the Russian Federation created the “Land of the Leopard National Park” in 2012 which covered about 60% of the leopards’ habitat and all of the leopards’ traditional breeding grounds. Besides this effort, scientists have considered reintroducing the Amur leopard to the southern Sixhote-Alin mountain range in Russia, creating ecological “corridors” that would connect neighboring Amur leopard populations, and establishing partnerships between different conservation organizations, veterinarians, and zoos globally in order to further protect the Amur leopard. With current evidence from the Southwest Primorye region of Russia showing population growth, the Amur leopard might be able to not only exist, but to thrive in the near future. A 2013 image of an Amur leopard taken by a camera trap in northeast China. Credit: WWF-China CAUSES OF ENDANGERMENT IN THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST Prey became scarce Wild boar, red deer, and roe deer became more common and leopards are unable to kill these on regular basis due to their size. Sika deer are a primary prey of the leopards but had begun to emigrate from Southwest Primorye to other areas. Intensive prey hunting during World War II and following the war decreased prey populations further. Lack of protection from poaching Insufficient wildlife protection measures and enforcement allowed for local hunters to hunt predators, and Amur leopards tend to be “treed” by dogs whereas Amur tigers are not as susceptible. This led to extensive hunting throughout the 1960’s and 1970’s. Environmental change Leopards do not adapt to deep snowfalls as well as Amur tigers, and a sequence of harsh winters probably debilitated an already struggling population of leopards in the Russian Far East. In fact, due to the new technology, the first recorded photo of two Amur leopard cubs in their habitat was taken in 2011. Finally, the record number of Amur leopard individuals trapped in 2011 may be the result an unusually high number of transients who were in the study area during observation. Regardless, the data collected from 2003 to 2011 is “good news” for the state of the Amur leopard. The overall population of Amur leopards has increased and there is a consensus by the scientific community studying Amur leopards that many individuals are emigrating to the Jilin Province of China, where no significant amount of data has been collected. However, it is known that there is a large area of suitable habitat typically uninhabited by Amur leopards in the Jilin Province of China, and officials there have begun implementing small-scale observation experiments similar to the one conducted in the Southwest Primorye region of Russia. Considering evidence of recovery from the observation study, the success of the Land of the Leopard natural reserve, and plans to reintroduce Amur leopards to their historical habitat of the Sixhote-Alin mountain range, the Amur leopard should be able to eventually recover from its endangered status withholding any unforeseen failures. BIBLIOGRAPHY Miquelle, Dale G.; Rozhnov, Vyachaslav V.; Ermoshin, Victor; et al. INTEGRATIVE ZOOLOGY Volume: 10 Issue: 4 Special Issue: SI Pages: 389-402 Published: JUL 2015 Rozhnov, V. V.; Chistopolova, M. D.; Lukarevskiy, V. S.; et al. ZOOLOGICHESKY ZHURNAL Volume: 94 Issue: 5 Pages: 593-603 Published: MAY 2015 Li, Zhilin; Kang, Aili; Lang, Jianmin; et al. Biodiversity Science Volume: 22 Issue: 6 Pages: 725-732 Published: NOV 2014 Kelly, Paul; Stack, David; Harley, Jessica TOPICS IN COMPANION ANIMAL MEDICINE Volume: 28 Issue: 4 Pages: 163-166 Published: NOV 2013 Xiao, Wenhong; Feng, Limin; Zhao, Xiaodan; et al. Biodiversity Science Volume: 22 Issue: 6 Pages: 717-724 Published: NOV 2014 "Amur Leopard: Russia Steps up Protection for World's Rarest Big Cat." - WWF UK. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Nov. 2015. "Hopeful Signs of Recovery for the World's Rarest Big Cat." Sinosphere Hopeful Signs of Recovery for the Worlds Rarest Big Cat Comments. N.p., 27 Feb. 2015. Web. 23 Nov. 2015. Spitzen, V. V., D. G. Miquelle, Y. A. Darman, V. V. Arimelev, M. Hotte, S. L. Bereznyuk, A. A. Laptev, T. S. Aramileva, A. A. Myslenkov, L. L. Kerley, G. Salkina, T. D. Arzjanova, V. A. Solkin, D. G. Pikunov, P. V. Fomenko, S. Aramelev, A. V. Kostyria, O. Uphyrkina, S. Christie, J. Lewis, M. Hebblewhite, J. Seidensticker, U. Breitenmoser, and J. Lukas. "A PROGRAM FOR REINTRODUCTION OF THE FAR EASTERN LEOPARD INTO SOUTHERN SIXHOTE-ALIN, PRIMORSKII KRAI, RUSSIAN FAR EAST." (n.d.): n. pag. Feb. 2010. Web. 23 Nov. 2015. "WCS Breaking News." WCS Newsroom. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Nov. 2015. Monitoring Amur Leopards and Tigers in the Russian Far East (n.d.): n. pag. Final Report to The Amur Leopard and Tiger Alliance (ALTA) from the WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY (WCS). Wildlife Conservation Society, Mar. 2012. Web. 23 Nov. 2015. THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY / COLLEGE OF ARTS & SCIENCES / GE NATURAL SCIENCE / ENR 2100 Historic Range of Amur Leopards in the Russian Far East As shown by the graphic, the historic range of the Amur leopard in the Primoski Krai shrank drastically following the 1940’s. This graphic shows the various zones of the Land of the Leopard national park in the Russian Far East. Careful attention was given to the planning of this park in regards to both human establishments and to the areas best suited for Amur Leopard habitats. Most areas are restricted from access by tourists but some areas allow for economic tourism. These tourist areas help to both spread Amur Leopard awareness and to generate revenue for the upkeep of the park. ANALYZING THE AMUR LEOPARD POPULATION OF SOUTHWEST PRIMORYE, RUSSIA Conditions under which the leopards were observed: 42 cameras in 21 locations within area of 270 km 2 Average of 3.7 km between camera traps 2-3 camera traps in typical female’s home range Camera traps inspected every 5-6 days Leopards identified and tracked by size, shape, and location of pelage rosettes Observation lasted from 2002-2011 Observation Area: Data collected from March-June 2011 resulted in 156 photos of at least 17 individual Amur leopards, and data collected from 2002-2011 resulted in camera traps of at least 41 individual Amur leopards. Of these 41 individuals, 14 were identified as male, 17 as female, and 10 of unknown sex. 37 of the 41 individual leopards were identified as being either adult or adolescent, and 4 individuals were identified as cubs. However, the data collected is most likely erroneous due to the long amount of time needed for the camera to prepare a second shot, meaning that more cubs following their mothers might very well exist. Of the 37 adults, 19 were camera trapped only once, suggesting transience; furthermore, 18 individuals were camera trapped multiple times, suggesting site fidelity. Some individual leopards were camera trapped for a majority of the study length, indicating a high survival rates for resident adults. However, a majority of the individuals who were camera trapped were only done so once or twice. This can be explained by either a low survival rate for most individuals in the area, or most likely, a high rate of immigration into and emigration out of the observation zone. CONCLUSIONS According to the data, there has been an upward trend in population growth, from 9 individuals in 2003 to 17 individuals in 2011. However, population growth is not steady: in 2008 and 2009 there were only 8 and 9 individuals camera trapped respectively. Also, improved camera technology implemented in 2011 that allows for rapid photo trapping of individuals caused the number of individuals trapped to rise in that year.