Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. htesr h oxsec fwllf ihhmn,epcal cosaeswt ofr fenvironmental of form no solutions with Finding 2016). areas al. across et especially Ginsberg, Ripple humans, 2010; & with al. (Woodroffe wildlife 2008; et livestock Craigie of al., 2009; of coexistence et al., the predation et (Wittemeyer ensure Western and/or including 2008; that edges conflict, competition al., human-wildlife their et and increased Wittemyer at to poaching, 1998; leading Moreover, density of and 2009). mobility al., incidences population animal et to increased human Harris restricting needs large 2004; 2019), concentrate territorial al. terrestrial al., et and most to et (Berger Veldhuis ecological result, tend extinct a the already As encompass areas et or 2008). to decline (Wittemyer protected Newmark, enough sharp biodiversity 2017; in large pressure al., conserving are are increasing et migrations in few putting (Ceballos mammal human a role 2001), populations only global al., vital mammal ongoing 2017), et large a the al., the sustain Lutz play years, et 1997; particularly to areas Aziz 50 al., protected 2008; 2002), due et next al., formal (Lutz Ehrlich, declines the billion Whereas, Over & population 10 ecosystems. exceed ecosystems. Ceballos sharp on to al., terrestrial 2017; experienced expected et on is have al., large (Cardillo pressure population which are et extinction anthropogenic species 2020), of Ceballos massive vulnerable al., brink 2010; and most the et the al., to (Atwood Among et 2020). species herbivores (Craigie Wiens, of Rom´an-Palacios & mammals myriad 2020; a terrestrial al., pushing et is Ceballos 2004; crisis environmental global The they if imperative is livestock Introduction their and people their with and ungulates people future. of with between provide the coexistence interacts results segregation into wildlife the Our persist spatial where allow to Nepal, habitats. suggest to are of lowland strategies results areas across better Our forest concentrate Finding community that in species. livestock. livestock conservation and ungulate improve abundance highlands, to overall individual on information the each critical mainly affecting of covariates occur and important deer distribution which barking most ungulates, the chital, the wild nilgai, and were by followed abundance ungulates ungulate, livestock livestock wild wild that and abundant found of elevation most We the that and of was Models. found lowlands boar ungulates Linear We the Wild Generalized wild in sambar. using 1. forests of covariates the to Rautahat individuals to 6 and wild and ungulates relation all Bara wild muntjak), occurrence in counted roads, outnumbered and (Muntiacus 2018 We March from abundance deer and assessed occurrence. distance We 2017 barking and November Nepal. land, nilgai, between abundance where conducted axis), agricultural unicolor)) transects Nepal, 35 (Axis (Rusa elevation, in along sambar (chital livestock how system and ungulate investigated is scrofa) area wild we (Sus This protected influenced Here boar the livestock conservation. of outside for livestock. abundance landscapes critical with relative human-dominated are coexist areas inhabit often non-protected that across wildlife ungulates activities for human true with especially interacts wildlife how Understanding Abstract 2020 11, September 3 2 1 Bhandari Nepal Shivish of lowlands the outside in livestock areas and protected ungulates wild between segregation Spatial mtsna osrainBooyInstitute Biology Conservation Smithsonian Texas North of University Nepal Network Biodiversity Himalayan 1 aioCrego Ramiro , 2 n ae Stabach Jared and , 1 3 Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. eteett h at(i.1.Ms ftelclpol nti rarl narclueadlivestock and agriculture on rely area this in people North, the local human to the scattered mountains ( of and corn Mahabharat forest Most are community the crops 1). main other west, The (Fig. and subsistence. the for south, east to farming the the Park to ( to National settlements Sal settlement human Parsa by and borders lands dominated area agricultural forest, The tropical species. by ) covered km is 300 approximate landscape an across (26.9-27.4 conducted was study This area on Study dependent are that methods people and and Materials species wild of survival. abundance coexistence for sustainable the ecosystems the these influenced ensure livestock to practices of sustainable abundance has ( relative (chital attention elevation, and the ungulates how ( little distribution investigated wild and we the of comparatively study, roads, drive occurrence this date, from livestock, et and In To their areas. distance (Smith protected 2012). and land, megafauna Nepalese farmers Kindlmann, Nepal’s agricultural outside including ungulates of & pressure, of conservation Paudel selection anthropogenic the habitat how sustainable 2009; for to the al., critical paid to et are been contribute Weggee that can 1998; items environment al., species, the these and ungulates of between management abundance relationship population the decreased (Ballari instance, Understanding for to farmers has, with they leading ( conflict conflict forests, This nilgai to and 2018). natural the leading al., competition, from and of et displaced damage interference Khanal are crop 2014; and ungulates increasing Barrios-Garcia, 2012; Once exploitative areas, & Kindlmann, 2017). agricultural via forcing Khadka, in & ungulates, 2004; areas occur (Poudel wild al., increasingly livestock food et displace (Mishra low-quality in spatially fitness livestock increases in reduced as concomitant forage 0.9%, concerns was to conservation to areas leading raised wildlife these has rise, across This loss the 2017). forest on Khadka, of rate also annual is The km population 2018). threatened (areal al., 28 Nepal are et in approximately species Shrestha land or ungulate 2016; forested al., all the et of of Acharya 29% half 2015; Approximately Over 2020). protection. al., of et estimate form Allendorf 14% only 2011; any with (Karki, under limited, extinction severely currently with is ( surface however, alpine habitats, land to these m) the for (˜200 protection of Formal tropical species. from of habitats, array of incredible diversity an wide a to (Halladay home crucial is 2010). Nepal is al., landscapes et human-dominated Sodhi across 1995; forests such Gilmour, mature & of species and tracts ungulate extinction large including conserving with 2008), mammals, threatened DiMarco al., ( now 2009; et gaur al., are (Schipper in et ), ( species strategies Xu declines hog mammal conservation 2004; pygmy large-scale improved al., Asian as consequential et of all Sodhi in need of 2003; urgent resulting one-quarter al., in Currently, 2014), et 2014). Brook Squires, al., 2002; 2010; Ehrlich, et all al., & of (Ceballos et the biodiversity impacted ( of (Sodhi local rates most million) livestock deforestation the 700 high of (about among experienced densities ˜9% has are Asia Forests (Sodhi Supporting 2012), Asia. km resources 2018). Chao, 300 in natural al., 2006; pervasive (Poffenberger, to et population particularly access Shrestha human al., been for global 2013; et has demand Bhawa, Ceballos loss the & Forest 2009; increase ecosystems. Shrestha al., to 2010; et tends al., (Western poverty et rural species countries, these developing of In conservation of future the for 2017). crucial is protection, u scrofa Sus 2 o gaurus Bos ya;Hne ta. 03.Ms oet r lae oices h ieo atrsfrincreasing for pastures of size the increase to cleared are forests Most 2013). al., et Hansen /year; > ° 600km 16,000 ;84.9-85.2 N; n abr( sambar and ) oeahstragocamelus Boselaphus ocl salvania Porcula ,adfu-ondatlp ( antelope four-horned and ), 2 smngdudrcmuiyfrsr rcie ylcladsaeette (DFRS, entities state and local by practices forestry community under managed is ) ° 2 )(i.1.Tetrani il,wt neeainrneo 0t 0 ....The m.a.s.l. 800 to 80 of range elevation an with hilly, is terrain The 1). (Fig. E) e erfrtepro ewe 01ad21 Srsh ta. 08.Human 2018). al., et (Shrestha 2016 and 2001 between period the for year per uaunicolor Rusa ,Ida os er( deer mouse Indian ), cosNpl(hnle l,2018). al., et (Khanal Nepal across ) xsaxis Axis ) ihtega fpoiigifraint epdsg more design help to information providing of goal the with )), e mays Zea ercrsquadricornis Tetracerus ,nla,brigde ( deer barking nilgai, ), 2 Moschiolaindica 2 eini h olnso eta-atr Nepal central-eastern of lowlands the in region ,wet( wheat ), hrarobusta Shorea rtcmaestivum Triticum ,sapde ( deer swamp ), IC,22) opoetlarge protect To 2020). (IUCN, ) utau muntjak Muntiacus > n cca( acacia and ) 00m ytm,supporting systems, m) 4000 ,ptt ( potato ), evsduvaucelii Cervus ccacatechu Acacia ,wl boar wild ), Solanum > Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. e o ml apeszs(Ic oprommdlslcin(una n nesn 02.W selected We 2002). Anderson, and modeling (Burnham each selection For model correc- analysis. perform Criterion for Information to deviation Akaike’s stan- (AICc) standard used We We sizes of covariates. correlated. sample unit all highly small one with were for combinations and covariates model ted zero continuous all of the fit mean we of a procedure, none and to variables distribution that checked all binomial dardized we with models, GLM fitting a abundance Before using species species covariates, single single different investigate investigating the to from to presence/absence us the logit relation into impeded variable in of species response probability each the each occurrence to transformed for we counts responds sample Instead, in small community responses. relatively variation The the covariates. high this mentioned how and the For to sizes evaluate abundance. responses species to relative single investigated ungulates livestock we Additionally, all and elevation, of relation fields, counts in covariates. agricultural different abundance the different for ungulate to added account modeled distance to We we length) 2010). roads, analysis, (Kery, transect explaining to lengths of factors distance transect (log the different offset to investigate to an to used due distribution We efforts Poisson landscape. sampling a the with across (GLMs) abundance models ungulate linear value abundance. generalized this relative used divided We of and measure transect transect-level the the a calculated along providing we analysis counted (ind/km), 2017), Statistical livestock transect al., of the et We species of (Hempson A1). four length herbivores all (Fig the large 2016). of area by Team, on individuals livestock Core agricultural of Development of or number effect (R road total potential analyses river, the geospatial for nearest all account for the To R to estimated in transect We imagery package 2009). each Earth raster Team, Development of the Google (QGIS used distance resolution 3.12.1 Euclidean high QGIS ungulate using agricultural using mean affecting USA) of identified the CA, adversely effect patches View, Department potential in Mountain agricultural Nepalese Inc., the all roads the (Google for digitized of from account manually To information importance we 2010). (Ben´ıtez-L´opez road recognized account areas, al., region To obtained the et 2007). the we given al., across occurrence, et Nepal), occurrence included (Farr species we (Kathmandu, model on Thus, elevation Survey roads digital change. of 90-m of elevation a north-south effect from marked the derived a for transect, presents each area for thought elevation study we counted. mean The were that species. transect covariates ungulate the of these of set center of a the incorporated Because from We m area. 100 study within m the present 1648 animals across = nilgai domestic sambar, length spaced randomly boar, transect were selected wild (mean Transects were (chital, varied m). species length locations species ungulate transects four starting wild difficulties, of Transect five number terrain the and deer). count buffalo) to barking and transects cows and line core sheep, 2016). 35 (goats, a conducted Chalise, livestock we & and 2018, of Bhandari elephants March deer, 1998; and for 2017 al., barking corridors November et Between nilgai, major Smith chital, 2020; the 1992; on Mishra, of al., effects and one collection et (Smith the is Data Allendorf tiger on site for 2011; specifically study Nepal (Karki, focused our in sambar) Importantly, we range study, habitat sambar. and this and boar In boar, wild 2020). wild deer, (e.g., al., barking predators et nilgai, large Bhandari including chital, species (e.g., mammalian herbivores ( fifty Elephants than (e.g., more herbivores to home ( tiger are forests community These wood. and leaves, firewood, include ( tuberosum uau arnee Bubalus function. ateatigris Panthera ,adrc ( rice and ), ,gas( goats ), ,cmo epr ( leopard common ), rz sativa Oryza ar hircus Capra > lpa maximus Elephas maatt ananidpnec Fg ) l frmnindwl and wild aforementioned All 1). (Fig. independence maintain to apart km 2 .Mi ietc pce nld ate( cattle include species livestock Main ). ,adsep( sheep and ), ateapardus Panthera ,oehre hncrs( rhinoceros one-horned ), vsaries Ovis 3 priori a ,adsrpdhea ( hyenas striped and ), ol ffc h bnac n curneof occurrence and abundance the affect could .Frs rdcs avse o subsistence, for harvested products, Forest ). hncrsunicornis Rhinoceros ± o arsindicus taurus Bos 9 D ag 7 o2799 to 573 = range SD; 496 yeahyaena Hyaena ) n large and )), ,buffalo ), ) mega )), Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. nlrehrioeocrec ttesnl pce ee.Hwvr h ffc flvsoko h community the on livestock of effect the However, level. species single the at occurrence large-herbivore on ungulates predominantly occur of which (69% livestock, livestock that highlands suggest of Results (93% lowlands forests. lowland on the to occurred comparison ungulates to in wild disturbances related of negatively species was five ( species community all by ungulate areas Similarly, the wild elevated in elevation. five in 6:1 to the by related mainly of positively abundance abundance and species overall abundance The wild livestock outnumbered Nepal. abundance of livestock species forests found three managed we other study, species’ the this five for In zero. change all overlapped little intervals Finally, confidence with This 95% but 3). trends, 3). Discussion boar, these wild (Fig. (Fig. all and abundance In probability area chital relative presence 4). agricultural for livestock deer (Fig. nearest stronger increasing barking much the with and was associated to sambar relationship road negatively distance whereas slightly was associated nearest and in area, negatively probability the slightly boar, changes agricultural presence was wild to presence with nearest of Chital Distance the little presence 3). to the varied 4). (Fig. to distance deer related with the barking positively Fig. of ungulates, with chital, presence 3, five the of to all presence related (Fig. the of negatively elevation to probability related increasing presence negatively the with was for explaining increasing accounted covariate 3). probability deer important (Table presence covariates barking 3). most four of (Table detections the all presence abundance of was included the relative Elevation number and explained livestock weight small best and model parsimonious the elevation that the most to included models of and parsimonious the due 78% weight most was is model nine This model the the and Finally, null of 3). presence 49% the (Table sambar’s for however, power explained accounted species, explanatory distance best this of (elevation, models For covariates lack ( Four three a weight. included suggesting 3). Table model and boar, model, weight wild 55% abundance; of model relative for presence livestock livestock the the accounted and explained and of agriculture best 60% roads, to that models for to distance two model accounted roads, found cumulative We to together 93% A2). distance which for Table (elevation, accounted 3, covariates Table presence abundance; four chital relative explained the best included that and models weight 2). parsimonious most (Fig. six -0.78]) The – -2.07 CI: 0). [95% overlap occurrence (-0.43 single-species not (-1.42 areas did Ungulate abundance agricultural intervals livestock from (confidence relative distance significant increasing increasing distance were and with as- increasing variables decreased -0.21]) and All ungulate but – 0.54]) the 0.39]), -0.65 – – that CI: 0.27 and 0.02 indicated CI: [95% CI: agriculture, results [95% [95% to averaged (0.41 (0.20 distance elevation roads Model cu- increasing from roads, of with A1)). to increased 100% Table distance abundance for 2, (elevation, semblage (Table accounted covariates abundance abundance four relative assemblage all livestock ungulate included explaining and ind/km). weight models 3.34 mulative parsimonious = most species two wild (54.9%), vs The cattle ind/km 6.2 was 20.71 was type = abundance abundances (livestock relative livestock ensemble Livestock combined abundant Ungulate species 1). most Table wild (3.0%; The all (18.8%), sheep than chital and 1). higher (25.7%), (17.0%), Table times nilgai buffalo by (2.8%; (24.9%), followed goats sambar (46.9%), by abundant and followed most (5.7%) the deer were boars barking wild species, wild Among the 2016). Team, using Results 2002), Core Development Anderson, (R and Burnham R (CI; in intervals packages confidence 95% a and on mates based models parsimonious most the n )frti pce Tbe1.Frnla,tremdl etepandispeec rbblt,which probability, presence its explained best models three nilgai, For 1). (Table species this for 5) = emnlaalata Terminalia , dn odfla ciawallichii Schima cordifolia, Adina > 0m oiae ySlfrss ie yefrs frssmsl dominated mostly (forests forest type mixed forests, Sal by dominated 300m) > < 0 .....Mr aaaecranynee oietf infiateffects significant identify to needed certainly are data More m.a.s.l.). 300 0 ....,aeecuigwl ebvrs hc ntr cu anyon mainly occur turn in which herbivores, wild excluding are m.a.s.l.), 300 Δ AICc < n oe vrgdrslst aclt aaee esti- parameter calculate to results averaged model and 2 4 and abri sissoo Dalbergia ,adoealfwrhuman fewer overall and ), MuMIn and AICcmodavg Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. oe htbrigde r on nfrs ra ihmtr re ihlrecnpe,tl hus denser shrubs, that tall possible canopies, it make large species with (2014) the trees for al. mature characteristics et habitat with Teng These areas areas. concealment. forest midhill for in preferred areas and also and/or found Paudel 2004; cover, deer are by shrub barking al., deer conducted Research that barking et and 2004). found that the ruminant al., (Teng Nepal forest-dwelling noted et support solitary, western vegetation (Teng a in forests results growing is broad-leaved (2012) Our deer the low Kindlmann in Barking livestock. cover with 2012). shrub of Kindlmann, decreased environments dense & probability number inhabits forested Paudel presence 2007; and prefer Wegge, its agriculture, & deer and Odden to barking landscape, distance elevated al., that et the distance, Paudel findings preferred 2011; road (Karki, species m) increasing deer this 3000 Barking with to ungulates. that up wild (approximately found other mid-hills We and than 2015). Nepal deer lowland barking in of be distributed individual/km) outside widely will mean is livestock occurring (0.19 with numbers populations lower coexist nilgai species. found can We most this ungulates of wild With future that 2018). where ensure the al., highlands to for the et activities critical into Khanal human species regulating 2014; the conflict pushing areas, alternatively, (Baral, of be protected or lower may species livestock associated is damage abundant with negatively crop impact most competing of and human second because be elevation communities the may higher farming be species with local This to with associated abundance. nilgai positively livestock found was increasing We presence with 2018). popu- Its al., small surveyed. et a species represents Khanal our region 2014; lowland abundance. Baral, sambar Nepal’s 2007; The low 2008). (Aryal, 2014). (Leslie, explain this subcontinent al., also country, Indian ( could et the the lation area Simcharoen of to study 2009; parts endemic the al., most is found in et In Nilgai we grass (Wegge individual/km). Consequently, abundant forest mean with riverine 2014). (0.12 to floodplains and al. study sensitive of grass our et lack highly with in Simcharoen are floodplains species 2014; Sambar prefers rarest al., species 2011). the eastern Karki et be from Yen Park: to such estimates National 2010; sambar National lowland, than Bardia (Wang, (Suklaphanta central higher and the pressures Nepal comparatively in Banke, are western anthropogenic sambar Park, Chitwan, and the National Parsa, study) of Bardia to density and (this and restricted Park abundance National mostly The Chitwan is habitats. et as nearby Nepal Pandey relationship includes areas in 2014; and a in sambar Barrios-Garcia, Parks, show only & of not occur (Ballari distribution boars did pressure The wild results hunting that our by suggest Furthermore, reinforced results boar. likely 2016). Our wild al., impact, land. the human agricultural data), by low (unpublished and observations in damage with Barrios- locations field conflict crop & human-wildlife our boar wild of on any Ballari wild drivers based that find between by However, major found 2016). not findings the also al., of did to Thus, We et one we (Pandey 2019). similarly surprising. as Nepal al., boar not roads, ( of wild et is and areas lowland the Bhandari species protected livestock identified from 2017; wild studies avoided Kelly, occurring Many abundant and & (2014). Nepal, most Garcia areas Thapa the in elevated 2016; was species preferred al., boar distributed et boar wild (Pandey habitats widely that m) suboptimal most findings 1500 using the our (around are of mid-hills chital one the that is to found boar who wild (2009), activities. The al. related et human the Wegge from in (2008), pressure activities high al. given anthropogenic et and Bagchi abundance from higher those Livestock ( abundance. areas (84.7 elevated livestock lower area than lower study lower with has our significantly & areas research than is previous and Thapa higher comparable, individual/km much 2013; directly 0.59 31.73 not clearly Kindlmann, of are 2009; are estimates & finding that (Wegge our Our (Bhattarai areas While abundances protected Nepal reported areas. 2013). to protected in restricted Kindlmann, Nepal’s entirely & species for almost rapidly reported Bhattarai is deer is species 2009; abundant that this al., of most system et distribution the a the However, habitat. for of critical 2017). informative one Kelly, protect largely is to are action chital species urgent The needs single that on and report cover we forest losing trends the and abundance < 0 niiul fnla hc ssasl itiue,msl usd fNplspoetdareas protected Nepal’s of outside mostly distributed, sparsely is which nilgai of individual) 400 ± .6idk2 htaa idmn,21) efudta htlpeerdeeae areas elevated preferred chital that found We 2012). Kindlmann, & Bhattarai ind/km2, 4.26 < 0m ih xli htlpeeec oad lvtdaes u eutsupported result Our areas. elevated towards preference chital explain might 300m) 5 ± . n/m,Wgee al., et Wegge ind/km2, 7.9 < 0 m) 100 Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. epn uigfilwr.W hn h ititfrs ffie nRuaa n aafrclaoainduring collaboration for Bara and contributions Rautahat Authors’ in for offices Thapa forest Bishnu for district and Bishwakarma, Nepal the Shambhu equipment Kathmandu, thank fieldwork. Pokhrel, We Some Babarmahal, Umesh Forestry, study. fieldwork. to of the go during Department thanks funding helping the Our for thank We US permission. Fund, US. study Conservation granting Wild, Adamson Idea Katie by provided the was thank to like needs would with We use ungulates wild space of the wildlife. coexistence of protect these future the on to Acknowledgments favor the depend insufficient for that that being imperative strategies species is Nepal management endangered activities animals, across critical human terrestrial reserves on only other large mainly formal not for many ungulates important, With also of are wild but findings survival. of These here, for presence described lowlands. livestock the habitats the herbivores high explaining from large The extirpated be the ungulates. being to for wild are appears many ungulates of thus, forests presence lands, lowland communal higher and the non-protected abundance the in in the found abundances affecting livestock abundance highly high are that time Nepal first of the forests for documented we study, this In Nepal. would of species, lowlands other the and in ungulates Conclusion conservation wild and generate biodiversity for goals boundaries, tiger sustainable to conditions dual for order as areas habitat with helpful such in improving approaches protected community be and Management species formal grazing the charismatic conflict. livestock al., to outside of human-wildlife regulating et beneficial minimum diet of protection (Wegge be with the sambar Extending sources can of and income opportunities, portion 2018) alternative 2020). ecotourism al., major of incorporating al., et a populations also et Khanal be while supporting 2014; (Bhandari to in (Baral, known hyena successful nilgai are striped been as species 2009; not such These have al., decline, Nepal 2009). sharp et lowland in (Wegge in species conflict landscapes many human-wildlife protected 2020). minimize addition, al., maintain In to to et corridor important Bhandari as biological is 2020; important ungulates well al., an wild et as as of properly. conservation Allendorf serves managed relationships, The it be Park, predators. predator-prey to National large et have This Parsa natural many systems (Ramakrishnan the for areas 2018). to habitat relationships protected al., connected potential the prey-predator is and et outside site alter Xiao forests study also community 1999; our the but al., Because of et focusing distributions, Most predators (Ramakrishnan ungulate 1999). with species affect al., conflict, wild wild human-carnivore only replaced Declining of not have cause species. abundance might that the ungulate it the prey wild be makes regulate of can domesticated size to conservation environment sample needed on the natural limited are for the our actions landscape in management as dominated study, urgent ungulates human this scale, this in wide in found a livestock trends on of the future results of confirm generalize the stability to to compromise needed hard may population is Nepal the research of more compromise areas While non-protected can may in in and however, ungulates. livestock mainly abundances areas, wild of occur elevated of abundance population which these presence high high of The ungulates, sustain Conditions excluding species. to sug- these lower. are study favorable much forests our is less lowland from abundance be the Results livestock in 2018). where al., abundance areas et livestock elevated habitat Shrestha and high popula- 2015; deforestation human that DFRS, in in increases 1995; gest Increases concomitant Gilmour, with challenging. & resources, is (Halladay natural Nepal fragmentation on of pressures system exacerbating area are tion protected the outside conservation Wildlife important detection be for will conservation community, accounting entire for research the Implication Future for results. but present. our species, was improve this species to for just steps the not future when 2006), species al., et the (MacKenzie detect probability to failed have we : 6 Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. asadload nSiauiNgru ainlPr,Npl usJEo 0 590-592. 50: hu- Ecol of J Russ Coexistence (2019) D Nepal. Youlatos Park, 9125- DR, National Bhusal Nagarjun 8: JoTT Shivapuri D, ( in Johnson 1307- hyena Nepal. leopards BA, lowland https://doi.org/10.1134/S1067413619060031. striped and in Mawhinney 143: toward mans conservation S, attitudes Conserv infras- Hyaenidae) Bhandari People’s other Biol carnivora: (2016) and (Mammalia: MK 9130. 320–331. roads 1758) Biol Chalise meta-analysis. Conserv naeus, of mammals. S, in A migration impacts long-distance Bhandari sustain to The how populations: mile: last (2010) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00548.x. The bird (2004). PA J Berger and Verweij 9. mammal 6- food B, 32: 1316. affecting Gnusletter on 44–49. Alkemade factors Nepal? in and tructure ungu- Nilgai A, diet 72: conserve to of scrofa Mammalia failed Benitez-Lopez Sus areas structure https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.12015. protected boar Have 44:124–134. wild population (2014) Artiodactyla). Rev HS of Mammal and Baral (Mammalia, review ranges. introduced A organisation India and (2014) native western Social in MN selection Barrios-Garcia in SA, forest Ballari (2008). tropical K dry Shankar a https://doi.org/10.1515/MAMM.2008.008. improved In- SP, in for (2017) implications 6:eabb8458. Goyal JJ lates Groombridge Sundarbans: Adv S, Bangladesh MA, Sci the Islam 70–81. Bagchi in M, 9: poaching Conserv Shamsuddoha reptiles. Ecol prey J, Glob and and Goodrich management. tiger birds, Her- A, of (2020) Barlow patterns mammals, WD S, vestigating among Tollington Pearse MA, extinction KH, Aziz Beard of EMP, risk Madin DJ, highest McCauley https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abb8458. the E, to at Hammill knowledge bivores SA, Valentine community TB, e0161717. Using Atwood 29:933–946. Conserv 11(9): (2020). Biodivers 4-9. pat- S ONE ( 32: bull Nepal. Thapa Blue PLoS (2007). southeastern and Nepal: A Aryal in S diversity in Dahal mammals. mammal conflicts S, of large https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-019-01919-0. Poudel Human-wildlife hotspots by B, potential (2016) caused identify Gurung M TD, injuries Kohl Allendorf and PR, fatalities Neupane human https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0161717. PK, of Paudel terns KP, Acharya References https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.jq2bvq87b Dryad Publisher: Accessibility Data draft-Equal, interests Writing-original interest/Competing of Visualization-Lead, Conflicts Validation-Equal, editing-Lead. Supervision-Lead, & Writing-review Stabach: Writing- Visualization-Lead, Jared Validation-Equal, editing-Lead. & Supervision-Equal, Writing-review analysis-Lead, draft-Equal, original Formal Validation- Crego: Ramiro analysis-Supporting, editing-Equal. Formal & curation-Lead, Writing-review draft-Lead, Data Writing-original Equal, Conceptualization-Lead, Bhandari: Shivish https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.2518.8.9.9125-9130 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.009 oeahstragocamelus Boselaphus https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2016.12.001 h uhr elr htte aen oflc finterest. of conflict no have they that declare authors The : . nLmai ol eiaest fNpl TigerPaper Nepal. of site heritage world A Lumbani- in ) 7 . yeahyaena Hyaena . Lin- Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. arsG hrodS ocatJC rmitJ,Bre 20)Goa eln nageae migrations aggregated in 853. 7:55-76. decline Rese Global 850- (2009) Species J Endanger Berger JRG mammals. JP, Cromsigt 342: terrestrial Townshend Africa. JGC, large in Hopcraft of Science CO, livestock S, with Thirgood Justice wildlife G, replacing Harris of L, change. Stehman consequences 17196. The D, Chini cover 7: (2017) Rep WJ Thau A, forest Sci Bond S, A, Egorov 21st-century Archibald Tyukavina GP, Hempson A, of SA, Turubanova Kommareddy maps M, TR, global https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1244693. Hancher Loveland High-resolution R, SJ, (2013) Moore Goetz PV, shuttle SV, Potapov agro- The traditional MC, (2007) of UK. role D Hansen Cambridge, the Alsdorf and areas D, Switzerland, L, protected Gland, outside Roth Burbank biodiversity IUCN E, S, Conserving Rodriguez ecosystems. (1995) Oskin M, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005RG000183. DA M, Paller Gilmour RG2004. Werner P, M, Halladay 45: J, Kobrick Geophys S, Umland 28: Rev Hensley 2221– J, Biol mission. R, Shimada Conserv topography Duren S, radar R, ungulates. Shaffer Crippen (2010) Rondinini and 143: D, E, J, carnivores Caro Seal Schipper JM PA, of P, Conserv Rosen decline Visconti TG, Hutton global E, Farr Biol the Meijaard RE, of A, evaluation Iacucci https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12249. retrospective M, Green Nepal. 1109-1118. Hoffmann A Kathmandu, D, B, Survey. areas. (2014). Mallon and C L, Research Collen Forest protected Boitani of M, Department C, DiMarco Africa’s Forests. E6089- Nepal’s of Carbone in State (2015) A, DFRS declines 114: Balmford population PNAS mass JEM, 2228. mammal UK. sixth Baillie program, Large people Forest ID, ongoing worlds. annihilation the biological Craigie declines. the across of numbers https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1922686117. indicators peoples Forest via as 13596–13602. and (2012) brink 117: S the Chao PNAS annihilation on losses extinction. Vertebrates mass (2020) Biological sixth PH the Raven population and (2017) PR, Ehrlich G, vertebrate R Ceballos Dirzo by PR, E6096.https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1704949114. 296:904–907. signaled Science Ehrlich crisis. extinction extinction G, the and Ceballos losses population Mammal and (2002) density https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1069349. PR population Ehrlich Human https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020197. (2004) G, 2(7):e197. GM Ceballos 343- Biol Mace PLoS J, carnivores. Bielby Nature world’s JL, the the Gittleman in Singapore. W, risk 131: extinction in Sechrest in A, deforestation Purvis follow Manage M, tiger extinctions Cardillo Catastrophic Environ of (2003) PKL 420–423. J Ng prey 424: NS, multi- Sodhi the and BW, York. selection New Brook Model on Springer, approach. management. ed. information-theoretic disturbance 2nd practical inference, A park human (2002) model DR for Anderson of KP, Burnham Effect Implications 57:89–97. Theriol (2013) Park Acta 350. P Nepal. National and Park, Kindlmann abundance National Chitwan Chitwan the BP, the of in determinant Bhattarai key tiger the of as species heterogeneity prey https://doi.org/10.1007/s13364-011-0047-8. Habitat of (2012) regions. preference lowland P habitat Nepal’s in Kindlmann hyena BP, striped the Bhattarai of https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6223. diet The 7953-7962. (2020) 10: UB Shrestha Evol C, Ecol Aryal C, Morley S, Bhandari https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.10.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.06.007 https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01795 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-17348-4 . . . 8 https://portals.iucn.org/library https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00173 . www.forestpeoples.org . . . Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. uaepe:eiec rmasuyo epr it nsuhr ni.Bo osr 9 113- 89: Conserv Biol un- India. Foundation large southern R of computing. in statistical reduction for diets environment Austria. the and Vienna, leopard language by Computing, A Statistical of R: caused for (2016) Team study decline Core Development a Tiger R from (1999) NW evidence Pelkey 120. prey: RG, Coss gulate foundation geospatial U, source open Ramakrishnan system. IJESD information Asia. geographic Southeast QGIS project.http://qgis.osgeo.org. from (2009) Team experiences Development distribution forestry QGIS community wildlife https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469- https://doi.org/ forest: of the 69. determinant - in 15:283–293. 5:57 People major Conserv (2006) Anim a M Poffenberger is Nepal. disturbance of identifying Human landscapes 1795.2011.00514.x. (2012) ungulates: midhill the mountain P Himalayan in of in Kindlmann conflict models https://doi.org/10.1186/s40555-015-0116-9. human-wildlife PK, suitability 54:37. of Habitat Paudel Stud driver (2015) Zool 321-328. conservation. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-015-0978-5. P a for 103-108. Kindlmann as areas 62: M, potential boar 6: Res Hais wild Wildl PK, Environ J The Paudel Eur of (2016) Nepal. study Ecol HP of a lands Sharma Front cervids: park PJL, solitary protected of Shaner 261-270. systems P, 110: mating Pandey Zoology and areas. muntjac. behavior Indian spacing protected and Predicting deer (2007) hog African P Wegge domestic M, of Odden between Isolation Competition (2008) (2004) https://doi.org/10.1890/070003. HHT WD Prins Newmark IM, Heitkonig 412:543- bharal P, and Nature wild modeling 354. Ketner Occupancy and SEV, (2006) growth. JE livestock Wieren Hines population C, LA, world Bailey Mishra USA. KH, California, of 803- Diego, Pollock end San JA, Elsevier, Royle 387: The estimation. JD, Nature Nichols (2001) DI, S MacKenzie unlikely. Scherbov population W, world of Sanderson 545. Doubling W, (1997) Lutz Blue S conserving Scherbov W, of 805. Sanderson Challenges W, (2018) Lutz NB Singh (2008) 16. and DM W Leslie Wright CG, Morley 362. A. ( musk Aryal Bull USA. Himalayan Arkansas, S, endangered of of University Khanal Dissertation, distribution and Himalaya. Nepal interactions, the trophic in ecology, deer Habitat Nepal. (2017) mixed USA. ANOVA, Landscape, MA, KK regression, to Burlington, Khadka Arc approach Elsevier, Terai Bayesian A analyses. the related ecologists: in for and WinBUGS prey models to their Introduction (2010) and M Kery tigers India. of University, abundance Institute Research and Forest Occupancy Dissertation, (2011) (IUCN). Nature JB of Karki Conservation for Union International (2020) IUCN https://doi.org/10.1644/813.1 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(98)00159-1 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-8901.2004.00885.x https://doi.org/10.1038/35087589 https://doi.org/10.1038/42935 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12595-017-0218-y oeahstragocamelus Boselaphus oeahstragocamelus Boselaphus 10.1504/IJESD.2006.008683 suosnayaur Pseudois . usd h rtce ra fNpl rcZo o 1 352– 71: Soc Zool Proc Nepal. of areas protected the outside ) . . https://www.R-project.org/ . nteIda rn-iaaa plEo 1 344– 41: Ecol Appl J Trans-Himalaya. Indian the in Atoatl:Bvde.Mm pce 1:1– 813: Species Mamm Bovidae). (Artiodactyla: . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zool.2007.03.003 9 . . https://www.iucn.org/ . . . Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. itme ,EsnP enW,Bro C rsae S(08 ceeae ua ouaingrowth population human Accelerated (2008) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1158900. JS 321:123-126. Brashares Science non-protected AC, edges. to Burton area compared WT, protected areas Bean at protected P, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0006140. in Elsen wildlife e6140. G, of prey Wittemyer 4(7): status their ONE The and PLoS (2009) leopards Kenya. I tigers, of Cuthill of areas 189–202. S, study Russell 142: case Conserv D, a ungulates Western Biol of areas: Nepal. responses protected Park, and of National relationship establishment Bardia Predator-prey the in (2009) to T of predators Storaas ecosystem their CP, temperate and Pokharel the M, in Odden P, ungulates Weggee of biomass 376–382. and 44: densities Oryx Science population Bhutan. Estimating ecosystem. (2010) Serengeti-Mara 26:593–616. SW habitat the Wang Conserv tiger compromise Biodivers and impacts muntjac human occupancy https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav0564. Nepal. Indian Cross-boundary prey 363:1424-1428. of (2019) high of habitat al trail: et characteristics Churia forgotten Veldhuis understudied sites 144- the the on bed of tigers 1: and importance and https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-016-1260-1. Prey the Forage Studies (2017) reveal M Policy use Kelly (2004). Pacific K, Z Thapa the Zeng & YL, Asia Song 1703.2004.00683.x. Z, ( Liu Asia. L, in Teng conservation Biodiversity (2014) 159. Lee D MRC, 143: Posa Conserv T, Biol Squires Tscharntke landscapes. Y, human-modified Clough in KC, biodiversity Hamer https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2009.12.029. forest JK, 2375–2384. Asian Hill southeast TC, Conserving Wanger (2010) R, TM Clements Trends LP, disaster. Koh impending NS, An Sodhi biodiversity: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.09.006. Asian Southeast 654–660. (2004) in 19: PKL quality 26: Evol Ng BW, habitat Ecol Oryx Brook and LP, distribution Koh NS, tiger https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.1998.97068.x. Nepal. Sodhi of 1338–1346. central analysis 12: Landscape in Biol (1998) elephants Conserv C Asian McDougal Nepal. SC, of Ahearn distribution JLD, Smith and that Status factors (1992) Ecological HR (2014) 34-38. Mishra JLD JLD, Smith V, Smith, 62:100-106. Chimchome Zool E, Bull Roche Raffles ( conservation. GA, fungus ( Gale Caterpillar sambar T, of influence Savini conservation A, and 807- Simcharoen harvest, Trade, (2013) tree Bawa 66: sinensis of KS. drivers as UB, regimes BioScience management Shrestha 6:e4855. and PeerJ factors Nepal. Socio-economic knowledge. in (2018) and change K Bawa cover threat, diversity, UB, Shrestha mammals: S, marine megafauna. Shrestha and land https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165115. world’s the terrestrial 225-230. of extinc- 322: status species The Science of (2008) world’s drivers al https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1913007117. the et reveal 4211–4217. Schipper change the 117: climate PNAS to survival. responses Saving Recent and (2020) tion JJ Wiens (2016) C, Roman-Palacios al 812. et Ripple utau muntjak Muntiacus https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.13 https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw092 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605300023206 nteHmlys ilCnev19 1 520. – 514 159: Conserv Biol Himalayas. the in ) uaunicolor Rusa nHia sad hn.Eo e 9 7–8.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440- 675–681. 19: Res Ecol China. Island, Hainan in ) https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605310000487 itiuinadaudnei etr hiad mlctosfrtiger for implications Thailand: western in abundance and distribution ) . https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4855 . . 10 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.10.032 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.10.020 . . Ophiocordyceps . . Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. ieecsi Ic oe egt n u.W uuaiemdlweight. model cumulative samples; = small number W. for = Cum. K corrected and weight, Criterion abundance. model relative Information = livestock Akaike’s W and AICc, = (km), in AICc fields differences agricultural parameters; to estimated distance of (km), i.e. road presented, to are distance models parsimonious most the 3. Table weight. model cumulative samples; = small W. for Cum. i.e. corrected and presented, weight, Criterion are model abundance Information = relative models Akaike’s W livestock parsimonious AICc, = and in most AICc (km) difference the fields parameters; Only agricultural estimated to of distance Nepal. (km), in road (ind/km), to distance (m), elevation 2. Table (2009) in area Y. study the Liu across transects H, 35 at prevalence Zhao and counts L, animal species Cai domestic Nepal. and Q, Wild in swinhoii 1. Yang unicolor Table 59:843- Rusa M, deer tables BioScience sambar the formosan Zhang to vulnerable Legends loss. the J, of biodiversity 232–240. Habitat Wu of 48: (2014) Oryx HY rate H, Taiwan. Ou Y, the Yang Ding SC, of Yen reduction J, significant Sino-Russian Liu the the along 852. toward X, area progress protected Tang China’s core between H, a Relationships (2018) in J Xu occurrence Ge https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4620. T, tiger 8:11677-11693. Wang areas. Amur P, Evol Mou Ecol protected shape B, prey border. inside Zhou L, ungulate populations Feng and H, of Robinson humans extinction M, Hebblewhite the W, and Xiao effects Edge https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5372.2126. (1998) 280:2126–2128. JR Science Ginsberg R, Woodroffe https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.10.6 oe AICc K 1 0.29 1.76 298.4 0.71 4 0.71 0.00 296.6 5 Abund. Abund. Liv. Liv. + + Agr Agr Dist. Dist. + + Elev Road Dist. + Elev Model al .Mdlslcinrslst netgt v pce fuglt curnei ea.Only Nepal. in occurrence ungulate of species five investigate to results selection Model 3. Table al .Mdlslcinrslst netgt nuaeasmlg bnacsi eainto relation in abundances assemblage ungulate investigate to results selection Model 2. Table oa 062.1(.0 74.29 11.43 65.71 20.00 42.86 (6.00) 20.71 54.28 (2.06) 4.02 (3.66) 10.48 (0.66) 28.57 0.91 (2.23) 11.43 20.00 5.30 34.29 (0.92) 42.86 3.34 (0.37) 0.90 (0.06) 1086 (0.09) 0.12 0.19 185 (0.21) (0.45) 0.59 597 1.54 33 Total 271 Buffalo Cattle 175 Sheep Goat 45 Livestock 10 Total 5 deer Barking 33 82 Nilgai Sambar boar Wild Chital species Wild https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605312001378 oa ubro nml enidk +S)Peaec (%) Prevalence (+-SE) ind/km Mean animals of number Total . Δ AICc 11 < .Teepaaoyvralsaeeeain(m), elevation are variables explanatory The 2. . Δ IcWCm W Cum. W AICc Δ AICc < .K=number = K 2. Δ Δ Ic= AICc = AICc Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. akn erEe 58 .001 0.15 0.26 0.15 0.26 0.00 0.00 35.85 42.47 2 2 0.19 0.19 0.00 27.00 0.42 1 0.42 0.00 38.45 0.20 3 0.20 AICc 0.00 K 29.85 Elev 3 Elev deer Barking Nilgai model Null Abund. Liv. + Elev Sambar boar Wild Road Dist. + Elev Model Chital Species it g.23.516 .70.72 0.07 0.65 0.07 1.60 0.51 0.78 37.45 0.08 0.06 1.52 2 37.36 1.30 1.73 0.36 0.44 2 37.15 37.58 0.08 0.08 0.28 0.58 1 3 0.38 0.13 0.07 1.20 1.23 0.12 0.55 0.49 37.05 37.08 0.36 0.26 1.43 0.08 0.11 0.17 3 3 1.53 36.11 37.28 0.47 44.00 0.11 1.76 3 4 1.68 0.30 1 28.76 44.15 27.30 1.13 2 3 2 28.12 2 Abund. Liv. + Agr Dist. Agr. Dist. Agr. Dist. Abund. + Liv. Road Dist. 0.68 + 0.59 Elev 0.14 model 0.17 Null Abund. Liv. 0.93 + Elev Agr Dist. 0.12 0.75 + 0.81 1.81 Elev Road Dist. 30.60 + 0.13 40.26 Elev 1.00 0.39 3 Abund. 4 Liv. 30.85 + 0.19 0.83 Elev model 4 30.68 Null 0.10 4 Agr 0.54 29.95 Dist. Abund. 0.16 Liv. 4 Elev Abund. Liv. + 0.46 Road Dist. + 30.31 Elev Abund. Liv. + Agr. 5 Abund. Dist. Liv. + + Elev Road Abund. Dist. Liv. + + Elev Abund. Agr. Liv. Dist. + + Elev Road Agr Dist. Dist. + + Elev Road Dist. + Elev 12 Δ IcWCm W Cum. W AICc Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. 13 Posted on Authorea 11 Sep 2020 — The copyright holder is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse without permission. — https://doi.org/10.22541/au.159986436.66819618 — This a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. Data may be preliminary. 14