Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 August 2021 | 13(9): 19191–19202

ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)

https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.6451.13.9.19191-19202

#6451 | Received 20 July 2020 | Final received 05 April 2021 | Finally accepted 28 July 2021

On the impact of earthquake-induced landslides on Red Panda Ailurus fulgens (Mammalia: Carnivora: Ailuridae) habitat in Langtang National Park, Nepal

Yogesh Rana Magar ¹, Man Kumar Dhamala ², Ajay Mathema ³, Raju Chauhan ⁴ & Sijar Bhatta ⁵

^1,2,4 Central Department of Environmental Science, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur 44613, Nepal.
³ School of Environmental Science and Management, Pokhara University, Baneshwor 44600, Nepal.
⁴ Department of Environmental Science, Patan Multiple Campus, Tribhuvan University, Lalitpur 44700, Nepal.
⁵ Department of Environmental Science, Golden Gate International College, Kathmandu, 44600, Nepal.

¹ ymagar2020@gmail.com, ² mkdhamala@cdes.edu.np, ³ ajaymathema1@gmail.com, ⁴ chnraju@outlook.com (corresponding author), ⁵ sijar.bhatta1@gmail.com

Abstract: In addition to the threats of human encroachment, infrastructure development, tourism activities, habitat fragmentation, and human-wildlife interactions, natural disasters also pose a threat to the habitat of endangered species such as the Red Panda. This study aims to assess the impact of the 2015 Gorkha earthquake-induced landslides on the Red Panda’s habitat in Langtang National Park (LNP), central Nepal Himalaya. Remote sensing and geographical information system were applied to estimate the potential and core habitats of the Red Panda, and collect information on earthquake-induced landslides. Field sampling and verification of remotely collected data were done within a year of the earthquake. Considering preferred vegetation types, elevation range, aspects, distance from water sources, and Red Panda presence points, an area of 214.34 km² was estimated as the potential habitat of Red Panda in the Park. Thirty-nine landslides were identified in LNP triggered by the Gorkha earthquake, 14 of which occurred in the core Red Panda habitat. As a result of the earthquake-induced landslides, a significant decrease in tree density was observed in the areas affected by the landslides. Similarly, the bamboo cover was observed to be significantly lower in the areas affected by landslides compared to the unaffected adjacent areas. The average size of the landslide, causing damage to the Red Panda habitat was 0.8 ha. The potential habitat damaged by the earthquake-induced landslide was estimated to be 11.20 ha which is equivalent to the habitat required by one Red Panda. The findings could be useful in initiating restoration of the damaged Red Panda habitat in LNP.

Keywords: Disaster, endangered species, geographical information system, habitat loss, habre, natural hazards, threat, wildlife.

Editor: Karan Bahadur Shah, Budhanilakantha Municipality, Hattigaunda, Nepal. Date of publication: 26 August 2021 (online & print)

Citation: Magar, Y.R., M.K. Dhamala, A. Mathema, R. Chauhan & S. Bhatta (2021). On the impact of earthquake-induced landslides on Red Panda Ailurus fulgens (Mammalia: Carnivora: Ailuridae) habitat in Langtang National Park, Nepal. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13(9): 19191–19202. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.6451.13.9.19191-19202

Copyright: © Magar et al. 2021. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of publication.

Funding: This work was funded by National Trust for Nature Conservation (NTNC), Nepal under the project Strengthening Regional Cooperation for Wildlife Protection in Asia, and Resources Himalaya Foundations (RHF), Nepal.

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Author details: Yogesh Rana Magar is an environmentalist currently affiliated to Institute of Socioeconomic Research and Development, Lalitpur, Nepal. He loves to do environmental studies and assessments and has research interest in biodiversity conservation, disaster management, climate change, and sustainable development. Late. Man Kumar Dhamala, PhD was an Assistant Professor at the Central Department of Environmental Science, Tribhuvan University, Nepal. He served with his academic excellence in the areas of conservation biology, biodiversity conservation, and wildlife ecology in Nepal. Ajay Mathema is an Associate Professor at the School of Environmental Science and Management, Pokhara University, Nepal. His research areas include environment impact assessment, GIS and remote sensing application in disaster, environment and development. Raju Chauhan is an Assistant Professor at Department of Environmental Science, Patan Multiple Campus, Tribhuvan University. His research areas include land-water-climate nexus, biodiversity conservation, disaster risk assessment and geospatial application in environmental planning. Sijar Bhatta is a faculty at the Department of Environmental Science, Amrit Campus, Tribhuvan University. His interest of research includes high altitude vegetation dynamic, biodiversity conservation and climate change.

Author contributions: YRM, MKD and AM conceptualized and design the research. Material preparation, and data collection was done by YRM, while analysis and interpretation were performed by RC, AM and SB. The first draft of the manuscript was written by YRM and RC; Review, editing and finalization of the manuscript was done by RC and YRM. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to acknowledge Resources Himalaya Foundation (RHF), Nepal and National Trust for Nature Conservation (NTNC), Nepal for funding this research. The authors also acknowledge Prof. Dr. Falk Huettmann and Prof. Jeffry S. Kargel for permitting the use of the data, Department of National Park and Wildlife Conservation, Langtang National Park, Red Panda Network, and WWF-Nepal for their support during this research.

INTRODUCTION

Natural disasters such as earthquakes can severely affect the earth’s biodiversity. Some disasters may severely threaten plant and animal species due to the destruction of resources than the other ones (Lai et al. 2007; Ding & Miao 2015). The Gorkha earthquake (Mw 7.8), that hit Nepal on 25 April 2015, had triggered 4,312 co-seismic and post-seismic landslides (Kargel et al. 2016). The Gorkha earthquake had severely impacted forests and biodiversity, mainly by the earthquake-induced landslides (MOSTE 2015). Furthermore, the debris avalanche and the air blasts that were triggered by the earthquake flattened the forests up to 1 km (Collins & Jibson 2015). A loss of around USD 303 million was estimated in the environment and forestry sector due to the Gorkha earthquake (NPC 2015a,b).

Habitat loss due to fragmentation and degradation affects over 2,000 mammal species, which is considered as the greatest threat to biodiversity globally (Wang et al. 2014). Some 13,800 km² of suitable habitats are available for Red Pandas in Nepal (Panthi et al. 2019), which is significantly lower than the previous estimates by Kandel et al. (2015) and Thapa et al. (2018), who had estimated 17,400 km² and 20,150 km² of suitable habitat for Red Pandas, respectively. According to Yonzon et al. (1991) and Yonzon & Hunter (1991a) an area ranging 68–108 km² habitat within the Langtang National Park is suitable for Red Pandas; they are sensitive to even the slightest alteration in land use patterns; and 24–68 individuals were estimated in LNP residing in three to four population patches.

Increasing human population and interference to nature such as road construction and tourism activities are causing habitat destruction of Red Panda (Dorji et al. 2012). Furthermore, habitat fragmentation (Mahato & Karki 2005; Preece 2010; Wei & Zhang 2010), habitat loss (Wei et al. 1999a; Preece 2010), poaching (Choudhury 2001; Zhang et al. 2008; Sharma & Belant 2009; Zhou et al. 2013) and livestock grazing (Yonzon & Hunter 1991b; Mahato & Karki 2005; Sharma & Belant 2009; Dorji et al. 2012; Zhou et al. 2013) are also threatening Red Pandas seriously. Large-scale habitat loss and fragmentation are hampering gene flow among the Red Panda population (Hu et al. 2011). On the other hand, the majority of the subpopulations currently existing are of a smaller size, increasing the probability of their extinction, even in the absence of threats from humans (Jnawali et al. 2010). Studies have shown that Red Panda being bamboo specialists, more than 80% of their diets consist of bamboo grass and is a major habitat component (Reid et al. 1991; Wei et al. 1999b; Panthi et al. 2015; Bista et al. 2019). The survival of Red Pandas is also being threatened by deforestation and degradation caused by the collection of forest products (Mahato & Karki 2005; Bearer et al. 2007; Dorji et al. 2012; Zhou et al. 2013), killing by the locals (Mahato & Karki 2005), cattle herders, and domestic dogs (Yonzon & Hunter 1991a; Dorji et al. 2012).

In addition to the human-induced threat, natural disasters also pose significant threats to the survival of Red Panda (Deng et al. 2010; Zhang et al. 2011, 2012; Meng et al. 2016; Wang et al. 2018). Gorkha earthquake-induced landslides in the LNP have affected the habitat of the Red Panda. However, a systematic and scientific study on the extent of the impact has been lacking. Ecological considerations are crucial in disaster preparedness and post-disaster management (Chang et al. 2006). An earthquake-induced landslide would be one of the indicators to estimate impacts of the earthquake on important ecological parameters like habitat area, tree density and food preferred by Red Panda. This study aims to assess the impact of the Gorkha earthquake-induced landslide on the habitat of Red Panda in the LNP. Specifically, this study explores the effect of earthquake-induced landslides on vegetation preferred by Red Pandas as shelter and food (mainly bamboo) and estimate the loss of habitat.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study area

This study was carried out in the LNP (between 28.3856–27.9628 latitude and 85.2154–85.8849 longitude, IUCN category II, National Park). Established in 1976, LNP is one of the prime habitats of Red Panda in Nepal. It has an area of 1,710km² and extends over Nuwakot, Rasuwa, and Sindhupalchok districts of Nepal and is linked with the Qomolangma National Nature Preserve in Tibet to the North (DNPWC 2017) (Figure 1). Main Central Thrust (MCT) is one of the most tectonically significant structures in the Himalayan orogeny that extend across the LNP in the middle (Reddy et al. 1993). Another major Himalayan fault called Main Boundary Thrust (MBT) extends further south of the Langtang making the region seismically more vulnerable (Macfarlane et al. 1992). The region lies about 74.3 km away from the epicentre of the Gorkha earthquake. Multhala area, one of the core habitats of Red Panda in the park was considered for field sampling and survey. The sampled habitat has an area of 4.26 km². The field survey was conducted within one year of the Gorkha earthquake (22–29 March 2016).

Data and methods

Primary data were collected from the field sampling, whereas other necessary data were collected from several secondary sources and open-access database (Table 1). Data on (i) Red Panda presence point (Kandel et al. 2015), (ii) rapid damage maps (Yun et al. 2015), (iii) earthquake-induced landslides points (Kargel et al. 2016), (iv) epicentres of Gorkha earthquake and aftershocks (Adhikari et al. 2015), (v) land cover map of Nepal, 2010 (Uddin et al. 2015), (vi) administrative boundary maps, and (vii) 30m Resolution Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) Digital Elevation Model (DEM) (Jha 2018) were collected.

Based on the literature on the niche and core habitat of Red Panda in LNP (e.g., Yonzon & Hunter 1991a; Yonzon et al. 1991; Kandel et al. 2015), we developed a potential habitat map of Red Panda in LNP for which we selected a maximum range for each niche factors. Broadleaved open/closed forests, needle-leaved open/closed forests were extracted from the land cover map of Nepal (Uddin et al. 2015). Although, sightings from lower elevations have also been recorded (e.g., at 2,210 m in Ilam, eastern Nepal; Bista et al. 2013), we used the elevation range of 2,800–3,900 m considering the sighting ranges of Red Panda in LNP. Preferred aspects (West, north, north-east, north-west) were extracted from the aspect map prepared out of the DEM using a surface analysis tool in GIS. The buffer map of less than or equal to 200 m from the water sources and geographical location of Red Panda signs in LNP were generated and used to develop the potential habitat map using QGIS version 3.0.3. The methodological flow chart is given in Figure 2.

Earthquake-induced landslides were masked for LNP from Kargel et al. (2016) and superimposed on the potential habitat map of Red Panda. Later, the validation of the landslides was done during the field visit. Based on the occurrence of landslides over the potential habitat, Multhala—one of the core habitats with high densities of signs and evidence of Red Panda—was selected for the field survey and sampling (Image 1a,b). The area was surveyed for the earthquake impact on the Red Panda habitat. Horizontal transect walk (n= 5) of length each 1,000 m was done along the five altitudinal belts at 2,900 m, 3,100 m, 3,300 m, 3500 m, and 3,700 m. Transect survey was carried out along small forest trails as opportunistic sightings of species is the most common data collection technique for the elusive Red Panda (Pradhan et al. 2001; Jnawali et al. 2010). Earthquake damage evidence along five horizontal transects were visually observed and recorded. Droppings of Red Panda—the most reliable indirect evidence—was used for sign survey as the animals usually defecate at the feeding site and it is difficult to observe elusive Red Panda directly in the field (Wei et al. 1999c; Pradhan et al. 2001; Zhang et al. 2004; MoFSC 2016). Droppings of Red Panda and other mammals within 10 m of each transect were recorded. Only those damages such as landslides and habitats that occurred after the Gorkha earthquake were considered after confirming the locations with the help of the local guide and informants from the nearest settlements.

The vegetation (tree density and bamboo cover) within and adjacent to landslides were compared (Linderman et al. 2005). Shannon-Wiener index of diversity and Simpson Diversity index within each plot was also calculated. Shannon-Wiener index ‘H’ is commonly used to characterize species diversity in a community. It accounts for both the abundance and evenness of the species present. It was calculated using the following formula (Shannon 1948).

Where S is the number of different tree species, n_i is the number of individual species, N is the total number of species.

Simpson Diversity index D is also a measure of diversity. It accounts for the number of species present, as well as the abundance of each species. It was calculated by the following formula (Simpson 1949).

Where S is the number of different tree species, n_i is the number of individual species, N is the total number of species.

The vegetation loss percentage within each landslide was also estimated. Data collected was analyzed using MS Excel 2013 and R (R Core Team 2020) to test significant differences in vegetation (i.e., tree density and bamboo cover) within and adjacent to earthquake-induced landslides. We used paired t-test to test the significant differences between the density and coverage of trees and bamboo in the sample sites within and adjacent to earthquake-induced landslides.

RESULTS

Potential habitat of Red Panda in LNP

This study estimated an area of 214.34 km² as the potential habitat of Red Panda in LNP. It is estimated that potential habitat including core habitat covers 12.53% of the total area of LNP. The presence points of Red Panda taken before the earthquake (red colour dots) falls within the estimated potential habitat (Figure 3). The recording of pellet groups (n= 27) and direct sightings of Red Panda (n= 3) in the potential habitat during the field visit indicate the validity of produced potential habitat map of Red Panda in LNP.

Earthquake-induced landslides distribution

Earthquake-induced landslides in LNP were masked out from the earthquake-induced landslide distribution map produced by Kargel et al. (2015). Thirty-nine landslides were observed to occur in LNP as a result of the Gorkha earthquake (Figure 4). The earthquake-induced landslide distribution map produced shows that 14 landslides occurred only in the Multhala region (landslides detail in Table S1). These landslides were verified during the field visit. The minimum and maximum area of the landslides were measured to be 123 m² and 14,567 m², respectively. Most landslides occurred in the slopes of 45–55 on the north and north-east aspects which were distributed close to the water sources like rivers and streams. Most of the landslides (85.7%) were of dry and rockfall types.

The total area of the landslides within the potential habitat of Red Panda was estimated to be 111,975 m². This accounts for 2.6% of the sampled habitat. During the field study, it was observed that many landslides were not included in the landslide distribution map produced by Kargel et al. (2015) as the work was solely based on remote sensing applications. It was also observed that some streams and springs had gone dry after the earthquake. The direct and indirect signs of Red Panda were recorded within sampled habitat (Figure 5). Indirect signs of other mammals were also observed within the sampled habitat (see Table S2).

Impact on vegetation

Three species (Pinus wallichiana, Rhododendron, and Betula utilis) and bamboo cover were considered for vegetation analysis (Table S3 and S4). A significant decrease in trees density (80% less) was observed in the areas affected by the landslides. Similarly, the bamboo cover was observed to be significantly lower (71% less) in the areas affected by landslides compared to the adjacent area within the sampled habitat (p <0.05). The mean value of both, bamboo cover and tree density, and diversity indices (Shannon & Simson) were found to be lower in the habitat affected by earthquake-induced landslides compared to the habitat without the impact (Table 2). However, diversity indices do not differ significantly between the two habitats.

An estimated loss of Red Panda habitat

The presence of Red Panda in and around landslides was confirmed by fresh (n= 5) and old groups of pellets (n= 22) recorded during the transect walk (Image 2). The pallet groups were found in landslides (2 spots), within Betula utilis trees (9 spots), Juniperous indica tree/bush (4 spots), Pinus wallichiana tree (3 spots), Bamboo bush (3 spots), Rhododendron species (1 spot), on stone (3 spots), and bare land (2 spots). The average size of a landslide that caused damage to the Red Panda habitat in the sample site was calculated to be 7,998.21 m² (0.8 ha). The area of the potential habitat damaged by the earthquake-induced landslide was estimated to be 111,975 m² (11.2 ha). Based on the ecological density of Red Panda (one adult /2.9 km²) (Yonzon & Hunter 1991b), the habitat loss was equivalent to the habitat of one adult Red Panda in LNP.

DISCUSSIONS

The potential distribution and quantified ecological niche of any species describe suitability and occurrence for supporting the survival of the species (Cushman & Huettmann 2010). The main factors that influence on habitat selection of Red Pandas are vegetation, source of water and human disturbance (Wei et al. 1998). Our study estimated the potential habitat to be 214.34 km² in LNP. The parameters used were: elevation range between 2,800 m and 3,900 m, distance from water sources up to 200 m, the land cover of broadleaf forest, evergreen forest, coniferous forest, shrubland, aspect of north, east, west, north-east, and north-west. The potential habitat map was in agreement with the distributions of Red Panda predicted by Kandel et al. (2015).

In the Hindu Kush Himalayan region, Thapa et al. (2018) estimated an area of 134,975 km² as potential habitat while Kandel et al. (2015) estimated potential Red Panda habitat at approximately 47,100 km² including 47.6% of potential habitat within Nepal and 27.8% within China. Compared to this, other studies have made 5.5–22.7% lesser estimates (Wei et al. 1999a,b, 2014; Choudhury 2001). Thapa et al. (2018), Kandel et al. (2015), and Mahato (2010) predicted an area of 20,150 km², 22,400 km², and 20,397 km², respectively, as the habitat of Red Panda in Nepal. A lower estimate of 8,200 km² has been made by Choudhury (2001). Two estimates have been made for LNP. Yonzon et al. (1991) considering suitable forest type, altitude, and aspect estimated an area of 68 km² as the suitable habitat, whereas Yonzon & Hunter (1991a) estimated an area of 108 km² as the suitable habitat of Red Panda. The distance from the water sources, one of the important parameters for habitat selection (Pradhan et al. 2001), was not incorporated in both studies. Furthermore, Pradhan et al. (2001) also recorded the occurrence of Red Panda in other forest types such as Rhododendron, Betula utilis, Pinus wallichiana forest besides A. spectabilis forest.

The number of earthquakes induced landslides in LNP was observed to be higher than estimated by Kargel et al. (2015). This could be due to the use of large sets of high-resolution satellite imageries for landslides mapping without intensive field visit as in the cases of other similar studies (e.g., Gorum et al. 2011). The sliding patterns were observed to be consistent in a diverse geological substrate and clustered near ridge crests, which are often the characteristics of earthquake-induced landslides (Meunier et al. 2008). The Red Panda habitat was damaged by the earthquake-induced landslides in LNP as the density of preferred vegetation varied significantly in the areas affected by the landslide. The earthquake-induced landslides also damaged the panda’s preferred species for food. The tree density and bamboo cover were observed to be significantly lower in the areas affected by the landslides in comparison with the adjacent area within the sampled habitat. The preferred habitat of the Red Panda is a forested area dominated by Abies spectabilis, Rhododenron campanulatum, Betula utilis, Juniperus indica, and Arundinaria sp., which provide ample food value and habitat for it (Pradhan et al. 2001; Sharma & Belant 2009). The spatial distribution of bamboo has a substantial effect on panda habitat (Linderman et al. 2005) as they are highly specialized to feed on bamboo (Kong et al. 2014). The loss in diversity and richness could be concerning as it may contribute to declines in forest productivity. Yet, disasters such as earthquakes may also contribute to new growth and higher forest diversity in the long term and large scale (Tilman 1996). The presence of remnant vegetation (20% on average) can be a driving factor for forest recovery. It is not only because it allows for seed dispersal, but also improves soil nutrient levels and raises soil humidity (Holl et al. 2000).

Although several studies have been conducted regarding the impact of the earthquake on wildlife habitats in other parts of the world, this is the first one in Nepal. This study estimated about 11.2 ha of the potential habitat of Red Panda in the LNP was affected by the earthquake-induced landslides that caused habitat degradation, fragmentation, and food loss. Furthermore, signs of other mammals observed in the damaged site indicate that the habitat of other wildlife were also affected by the landslides. The finding shows that the habitat required for only one panda has been affected in LNP. It is significant damage and threat to the elusive species considering its low population (24–68 individuals) in LNP and the practice of illegal hunting of this species in the area. Similarly, the fragmentation of habitat by the landslides could have severe consequences like damaging the food and associated trees favoured by Red Pandas. Mapping potential habitat for the Red Panda has broader implications in population estimates, forecasting, reintroduction, and science-based adaptive management in the LNP. Remote sensing and GIS application could be an essential tool to study the impact of the disaster on the wildlife habitat.

Table 1. Description of data and sources.

Data	Source	Description
Red Panda presence point	Kandel et al. 2015	Freely available Red Panda presence points were extracted and overlaid in LNP on the map.
Rapid damage maps	Yun et al. 2015	Information of earthquake-induced landslides taken from this part of the literature helped to identify the areas of occurence of landslides in core habitat.
Earthquake-induced landslides points	Kargel et al. 2016	Earthquake-induced landslides points were overlaid in LNP in the map which helped for accuracy and validation of rapid damage images.
Epicentres of Gorkha earthquake and aftershocks	Adhikari et al. 2015	Epicentres of the Gorkha earthquake and aftershocks overlaid in the map of LNP.
Land cover map of Nepal, 2010	Uddin et al. 2015	The land cover map was overlaid in the map of LNP to select the range of preferred vegetation to map out a potential habitat range within LNP.
Digital Elevation Model (SRTM 30 m)	USGS 2017	30m Resolution Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) Digital Elevation Model (DEM) was extracted from United States Geological Society (https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov)
Landslides points and dimensions	Transect Walk	Landslides were observed along transects in the sampling area and the dimensions were measured.
Tree density, vegetation cover and canopy cover of bamboo	Quadrat sampling	Quadrats of 10 x 10 m were laid inside landslides and adjacent to the landslide to compare tree density, vegetation cover and canopy cover of bamboo.

Table 2. Vegetation characteristics in the habitat affected by the landslide and adjacent habitat.

Parameters	Habitat impacted by landslides	Habitat adjacent to the landslides
Shannon Diversity Index (H)	0.99	1.017
Simpson Diversity index (D)	0.614	0.621
Bamboo cover (%)	0.147	0.521
Tree density (no./m^2)	2.714	2.828
Pinus wallichiana (no./m^2)	0.428	0.50
Rhododendron sp. (no./m^2)	0.87	0.90
Betula utilis (no./m^2)	1.30	1.414

For figures & images - - click here

REFERENCES

Adhikari, L.B., U.P. Gautam, B.P. Koirala, M. Bhattarai, T. Kandel, R.M. Gupta, C. Timsina, N. Maharjan, K. Maharjan, T. Dahal, R. Hoste-Colomer, Y. Cano, M. Dandine, A. Guilhem, S. Merrer, P. Roudil & L. Bollinger (2015). The aftershock sequence of the 2015 April 25 Gorkha-Nepal earthquake. Geophysical Journal International 203(3): 2119–2124. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggv412

Bearer, S., M. Linderman, J. Huang, L. An, G. He & J. Liu (2007). Effects of fuelwood collection and timber harvesting on giant panda habitat use. Biological Conservation 141(2): 385–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2007.10.009

Bista, D. & R. Paudel (2013). An overview of the status and conservation initiatives of Red Panda Ailurus fulgens (Cuvier, 1825) in Nepal. The Initiation 5: 171–181.

Bista, D., P.K. Paudel, S.R. Jnawali, A.P. Sherpa, S. Shrestha & K.P. Acharya (2019).Red Panda fine-scale habitat selection along a Central Himalayan longitudinal gradient. Ecology and Evolution 9(9): 5260–5269. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5116

Chang, H.J., R. Hargrove, Y.X. Long & D.J. Osborne (2006). Reconstruction after the 2004 tsunami: Ecological and cultural considerations from case studies. Landscape and Ecological Engineering 2(1): 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-006-0035-3

Choudhury, A. (2001). An overview of the status and conservation of the Red PandaAilurus fulgens in India, with reference to its global status. Oryx 35(3): 250–259. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3008.2001.00181.x

Collins, B.D. & R.W. Jibson (2015). Assessment of existing and potential landslide hazards resulting from the April 25, 2015 Gorkha, Nepal earthquake sequence. US Geological Survey.

Cushman, S.A. & F. Huettmann (Eds.) (2010). Spatial Complexity, Informatics, and Wildlife Conservation. Tokyo. Springer, 349–368pp.

Deng, X., Q. Jiang, Q. Ge & L. Yang (2010). Impacts of the Wenchuan Earthquake on the giant panda nature reserves in China. Journal of Mountain Science 7(2): 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-010-1073-8

Ding, M. & C. Miao (2015). Comparative analysis of the distribution characteristics of geological hazards in the Lushan and Wenchuan earthquake-prone areas. Environmental Earth Sciences 74(6): 5359–5371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4549-6

DNPWC (2017). Protected Areas of Nepal. Department of National Park and Wildlife Conservation. Government of Nepal.

Dorji, S., R. Rajaratnam & K. Vernes (2012). The Vulnerable Red Panda Ailurus fulgens in Bhutan: distribution, conservation status and management recommendations. Oryx 46(October): 536–543. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605311000780

Glatston, A.R. (Ed.) (2010). Red Panda: Biology and Conservation of the First Panda. William Andrew.

Gorum, T., X. Fan, C.J. van Westen, R.Q. Huang, Q. Xu, C. Tang & G. Wang (2011). Distribution pattern of earthquake-induced landslides triggered by the 12 May 2008 Wenchuan earthquake. Geomorphology 133(3–4): 152–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.12.030

Groves, C. (2011). The taxonomy and phylogeny of Ailurus pp. 101–124. In: Glatston, A. (ed.). Red Panda: Biology and Conservation of the First Panda. Academic Press, 488pp.

Holl, K.D., M.E. Loik, E.H.V. Lin & I.A. Samuels (2000). Tropical montane forest restoration in Costa Rica: Overcoming barriers to dispersal and establishment. Restoration Ecology 8(4): 339–349. https://doi.org/10.1046/J.1526-100X.2000.80049.x

Hu, Y., Y. Guo, D. Qi, X. Zhan, H. Wu, M.W. Bruford & F. Wei (2011). Genetic structuring and recent demographic history of Red Pandas (Ailurus fulgens) inferred from microsatellite and mitochondrial DNA. Molecular Ecology 20(13): 2662–2675. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05126.x

IUCN (2000). Trade Measures in Multilateral Environmental Agreements. A report prepared by IUCN - The World Conservation Union on the Effectiveness of Trade Measures Contained in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

Jha, R. (2018). Application of 30m resolution SRTM DEM in Nepal. Journal of the Institute of Engineering 14(1): 235–240. https://doi.org/10.3126/jie.v14i1.20089

Jnawali, S., K. Leus, S. Molur, A. Glatston & S. Walker (2010). Red Panda (Ailurus fulgens) in Nepal. In: A Population and Habitat Viability Assessment (PHVA) and Species Conservation Strategy (SCS) Workshop. Conservation Planning Specialist Group-South Asia & Zoo Outreach Organization, Coimbatore, 66pp.

Kandel, K., F. Huettmann, M.K. Suwal, G.R. Regmi, V. Nijman, K.A.I. Nekaris, S.T. Lama, A. Thapa, H.P. Sharma & T.R. Subedi (2015). Rapid multi-nation distribution assessment of a charismatic conservation species using open access ensemble model GIS predictions: Red Panda (Ailurus fulgens) in the Hindu-Kush Himalaya region. Biological Conservation 181: 150–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.10.007

Kargel, J.S., G.J. Leonard, D.H. Shugar, U.K. Haritashya, A. Bevington, E.J. Fielding, K. Fujita, M. Geertsema, E.S. Miles, J. Steiner, E. Anderson, S. Bajracharya, G.W. Bawden, D. F. Breashears, A. Byers, B. Collins, M.R. Dhital, A. Donnellan, T.L. Evans, M.L. Geai, M.T. Glasscoe, D. Green, D.R. Gurung, R. Heijenk, A. Hilborn, K. Hudnut, C. Huyck, W.W. Immerzeel, J. Liming, R. Jibson, A. Kääb, N. R. Khanal, D. Kirschbaum, P.D.A. Kraaijenbrink, D. Lamsal, L. Shiyin, L. Mingyang, D. McKinney, N.K. Nahirnick, Nan Zhuotong, S. Ojha, J. Olsenholler, T.H. Painter, M. Pleasants, K.C. Pratima, Q.I. Yuan, B.H. Raup, D.Regmi, D.R. Rounce, A. Sakai, S. Donghui, J.M. Shea, A.B. Shrestha, A. Shukla, D. Stumm, M. van der Kooij, K. Voss, W. Xin, B. Weihs, D. Wolfe, W. Lizong, Y. Xiaojun, M.R. Yode & N. Young (2016). Geomorphic and geologic controls of geohazards induced by Nepal’s 2015 Gorkha earthquake. Science 351(6269): 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac8353

Kong, F., J. Zhao, S. Han, B. Zeng, J. Yang, X. Si, B. Yang, M. Yang, H. Xu & Y. Li (2014). Characterization of the gut microbiota in the Red Panda (Ailurus fulgens). PLoS ONE 9(2): e87885. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087885

Lai, Y.C., B.S. Shieh & Y.C. Kam (2007). Population patterns of a Riparian Frog (Rana swinhoana) before and after an earthquake in subtropical Taiwan. Biotropica 39(6): 731–736. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2007.00320.x

Linderman, M., S. Bearer, L. An, Y. Tan, Z. Ouyang & J. Liu (2005). The effects of understory bamboo on broad-scale estimates of giant panda habitat. Biological Conservation 121(3): 383–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2004.05.011

Macfarlane, A.M., K.V. Hodges & D. Lux (1992). A structural analysis of the Main Central Thrust Zone, Langtang-National-Park, Central Nepal Himalaya. Geological Society of America Bulletin 104(11): 1389–1402.

Mahato, N.K. & J.B. Karki (2005). Distribution and habitat assessment of Red Panda Ailurus fulgens in Kanchenjunga Conservation Area with reference to Riya samba and Lama Khanak forests. Nepal Journal of Forestry 12(3).

Meng, Q., F. Miao, J. Zhen, Y. Huang, X. Wang & Y. Peng (2016). Imapct of earthquake-induced landslide on the habitat suitability of giant panda in Wolong, China. Journal of Mountain Science 13(10): 1789–1805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629

Meunier, P., N. Hovius & J.A. Haines (2008). Topographic site effects and the location of earthquake-induced landslides. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 275(3–4): 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2008.07.020

MoFSC (2016). Red Panda Field Survey and Protocol for Community Based Monitoring. Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal.

MOSTE (2015). Nepal Earthquake 2015: Rapid Environmental Assessment. Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment, Kathmandu, Nepal.

NPC (2015a). Nepal Earthquake 2015. Post Disaster Needs Assessment, Volume A. National Planning Commission. Kathmandu, Nepal.

NPC (2015b). Nepal Earthquake 2015. Post Disaster Needs Assessment, Volume B. National Planning Commission. Kathmandu, Nepal.

Panthi, S., S.C. Coogan, A. Aryal, & D. Raubenheimer (2015). Diet and nutrient balance of Red Panda in Nepal. The Science of Nature 102(9–10): 54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-015-1307-2

Pradhan, S., G.K. Saha & J.A. Khan (2001). Ecology of the Red Panda Ailurus fulgens in the Singhalila National Park, Darjeeling, India. Biological Conservation 98(1): 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(00)00079-3

Preece, B. (2011). Red Panda Pathology pp. 287–302. In: Glatston, A.R. (Ed.). Red Panda. William Andrew Publishing, Oxford.

R Core Team (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.

Reddy, S.M., M.P. Searle & J.A. Massey (1993). Structural evolution of the High Himalayan Gneiss sequence, Langtang Valley, Nepal. Geological Society, London, Special Publications 74: 375–389. https://doi.org/10.1144/gsl.sp.1993.074.01.25

Reid, D.G., H. Jinchu & H. Yan (1991). Ecology of the Red Panda Ailurus fulgens in the Wolong Reserve, China. Journal of Zoology 225(3): 347-364.

Shannon, C.E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal 27(3): 379–423.

Sharma, H.P. & J.L. Belant (2009). Distribution and observations of Red Pandas Ailurus fulgens fulgens in Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve, Nepal. Small Carnivore Conservation 40(December 2014): 33–35.

Simpson, E.H. (1949). Measurement of Diversity. Nature 163(4148): 688–688. https://doi.org/10.1038/163688a0

Thapa, A., R. Wu, Y. Hu, Y. Nie, P.B. Singh, J. R. Khatiwada, L. Yan, X. Gu & F. Wei (2018). Predicting the potential distribution of the endangered Red Panda across its entire range using MaxEnt modeling. Ecology and Evolution 8(10): 10542–10554. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4526

Tilman, D. (1996). Ecological determinants of species loss in remnant Prairies. Science 273(5281): 1555–1558. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.273.5281.1555

Uddin, K., H.L. Shrestha, M.S.R. Murthy, B. Bajracharya, B. Shrestha, H. Gilani, S. Pradhan & B. Dangol (2015). Development of 2010 national land cover database for Nepal. Journal of Environmental Management 148: 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.07.047

Wang, J., W. Jin, Y.F. Cui, W.F. Zhang, C.H. Wu & P. Alessandro (2018). Earthquake-triggered landslides affecting a UNESCO Natural Site: the 2017 Jiuzhaigou Earthquake in the World National Park, China. Journal of Mountain Science 15(7): 1412–1428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-018-4823-7

Wang, X., F.G. Blanchet & N. Koper (2014). Measuring habitat fragmentation: An evaluation of landscape pattern metrics. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 5(7): 634–646. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12198

Wei, F., Z. Feng, Z. Wang & J. Hu (1999a). Current distribution, status and conservation of wild Red Pandas Ailurus fulgens in China. Biological Conservation 89(3): 285–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(98)00156-6

Wei, F., Z. Feng, Z. Wang, A. Zhou & J. Hu (1999b). Use of the nutrients in bamboo by the Red Panda (Ailurus fulgens). Journal of Zoology 248(4): 535–541.

Wei, F., Z. Feng, Z. Wang, A. Zhou & J. Hu (1999c). Nutrient and energy requirements of Red Panda (Ailurus fulgens) during lactation. Mammalia 63(1): 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1515/mamm.1999.63.1.3

Wei, F. & Z. Zhang (2010). Red Pandas in the Wild in China pp. 375–391. In: Red Panda: Biology and Conservation of the First Panda. William Andrew Publishing.

Wei, W., W. Fuwen, H. Jinchu, F. Zuojian & Y. Guang (1998). Habitat selection by Red Panda in Mabian Dafengding Reserve. Acta Theriologica Sinica 18(1): 15–20.

Xu, M., Z. Wang, L. Qi, L. Liu & K. Zhang (2012). Disaster chains initiated by the Wenchuan earthquake. Environmental Earth Sciences 65(4): 975–985. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-011-0905-3

Yonzon, P., R. Jones & J.M. Fox (1991). Geographic information systems for assessing habitat and estimating population of Red Pandas in Langtang National Park, Nepal. Ambio 20(7): 285–288.

Yonzon, P.B. (1989). Ecology and conservation of the Red Panda in the Nepal-Himalayas. University of Maine Orono, ME.

Yonzon, P.B. & M.L. Hunter (1991a). Cheese, tourists and Red Pandas in Nepal Himalayas. Conservation Biology 5(2): 196–202.

Yonzon, P.B. & M.L. Hunter (1991b). Conservation of the Red Panda Ailurus fulgens. Biological Conservation 57(1): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(91)90104-H

Yun, S.H., K. Hudnut, S. Owen, F. Webb, M. Simons, P. Sacco, E. Gurrola, G. Manipon, C. Liang, E. Fielding, P. Milillo, H. Hua & A. Coletta (2015). Rapid damage mapping for the 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha Earthquake using synthetic aperture radar data from COSMO–SkyMed and ALOS-2 Satellites. Seismological Research Letters 86(6): 1549–1556. https://doi.org/10.1785/0220150152

Zhang, J., V. Hull, W. Xu, J. Liu, Z. Ouyang, J. Huang, X. Wang & R. Li (2011). Impact of the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake on biodiversity and giant panda habitat in Wolong Nature Reserve, China. Ecological Research 26(3): 523–531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-011-0809-4

Zhang, J.S., P. Daszak, H.L. Huang, G.Y. Yang, A.M. Kilpatrick & S. Zhang (2008). Parasite threat to panda conservation. EcoHealth 5(1): 6–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-007-0139-8

Zhang, Z., F. Wei, M. Li, B. Zhang, X. Liu & J. Hu (2004). Microhabitat separation during winter among sympatric giant pandas, Red Pandas, and tufted deer: the effects of diet, body size, and energy metabolism. Canadian Journal of Zoology 82: 1451–1458. https://doi.org/10.1139/Z04-129

Zheng, W., Y. Xu, L. Liao, X. Yang, X. Gu, T. Shang & J. Ran (2012). Effect of the Wenchuan earthquake on habitat use patterns of the giant panda in the Minshan Mountains, southwestern China. Biological Conservation 145(1): 241–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.11.016

Zhou, X., H. Jiao, Y. Dou, A. Aryal, J. Hu, J. Hu & X. Meng (2013). The winter habitat selection of Red Panda (Ailurus fulgens) in the Meigu Dafengding National Nature Reserve, China. Current Science 105(10): 1425–1429.

Table S1. Landslides in sampled habitat.

Landslide No	Lat.	Long.	Elevation (in m)	Slope	Aspect	Landslide type	Water status	Dead vegetation in landslide (in %)	Remarks
1	28.028	85.432	3,189	46–50	N	rock fall	dry	75
2	28.028	85.432	3,236	45–55	NE	rock fall	dry	75	old droppings
3	28.0288	85.432	3,130	50–55	NE	rock fall	dry	75
4	28.028	85.416	3,168	45–50	N	rock fall	dry	75
5	28.026	85.417	3,201	45–55	NE	rock fall	dry	75
6	28.028	85.429	3,343	45	N	rock fall	dry	75
7	28.025	85.434	3,138	45–60	NE	rock fall	dry	90
8	28.025	85.434	3,082	50	NE	rock fall	dry	90
9	28.025	85.434	3,063	50	SE	rock fall	dry	90
10	28.026	85.435	3,082	50	SE	rock fall	dry	75
11	28.026	85.436	3,086	45	NE	rock fall	dry	95
12	28.027	85.437	2,968	45	NE	rock fall	Spring	75	mammal scat
13	28.025	85.433	3,199	70–80	SW	rock fall	Spring	80
14	28.020	85.436	3,190	45–50	N	rock fall	dry	75

Table S2. Sign of mammals (other than Red Panda) in the sampled habitat observed during field survey.

	Lat	Long	Elevation (m)	Animal sign (probably)
1	28.026	85.434	3212	Scat of unknown mammals
2	28.028	85.430	3301	Scat of deer (Cervidae sp.)
3	28.028	85.428	3332	Scat of deer (Cervidae sp.)
4	28.026	85.428	3490	Scat of goral (Naemorhedus sp.)
5	28.025	85.428	3500	Scat of yellow-throated martin (Martes flavigula)
6	28.026	85.433	3232	Fresh pellets of other mammals
7	28.024	85.432	3390	Scat of deer (probably Cervidae sp.)

Table S3. Vegetation data from quadrate sampling in the Red Panda habitat without landslide impact.

Quadrate	Betula sp.	Rhododendron sp.	Pinus wallichiana	Total number of trees	Bamboo cover %
Q1	5	4	0	9	80
Q2	1	2	0	3	85
Q3	1	0	0	1	25
Q4	1	1	1	3	90
Q5	0	1	4	5	80
Q6	1	5	0	6	80
Q7	3	1	0	4	75
Q8	5	0	0	5	45
Q9	0	1	0	1	25
Q10	0	1	1	2	50
Q11	0	1	1	2	40
Q12	1	5	0	6	35
Q13	5	0	0	5	20
Q14	0	0	0	0	25
Q15	0	0	1	1	5
Q16	1	1	0	2	75
Q17	0	1	1	2	80
Q18	3	0	1	4	25
Q19	2	0	1	3	20
Q20	0	0	1	1	33
Q21	0	2	0	2	35
Q22	1	3	0	4	75
Q23	3	0	0	3	20
Q24	0	1	0	1	90
Q25	0	1	0	1	80
Q26	0	1	1	2	0
Q27	0	1	0	1	5
Q28	0	1	0	1	20
Q29	2	1	0	3	10
Q30	0	0	0	0	99
Q31	1	1	0	2	75
Q32	1	0	0	1	30
Q33	0	1	0	1	75
Q34	3	1	0	4	20
Q35	0	0	0	0	45
Q36	0	1	0	1	55
Q37	0	0	0	0	55
Q38	1	1	0	2	75
Q39	2	0	0	2	60
Q40	1	0	0	1	80
Q41	0	2	1	3	10
Q42	0	1	0	1	85
Q43	0	1	0	1	35
Q44	1	0	0	1	95
Q45	1	1	1	3	75
Q46	0	1	4	5	70
Q47	0	1	0	1	85
Q48	0	0	5	5	65
Q49	0	0	2	2	35
Q50	0	1	3	4	75
Q51	3	0	1	4	75
Q52	7	0	0	7	20
Q53	1	1	0	2	50
Q54	0	1	0	1	95
Q55	0	1	3	4	5
Q56	3	3	0	6	25
Q57	9	0	1	10	95
Q58	3	3	0	6	5
Q59	5	0	1	6	10
Q60	3	1	0	5	0
Q61	0	2	0	2	35
Q62	0	3	0	3	61
Q63	4	0	0	4	80
Q64	4	0	0	4	95
Q65	3	0	0	3	95
Q66	3	0	0	3	25
Q67	1	0	0	1	25
Q68	1	0	0	1	75
Q69	2	0	0	2	65
Q70	1	0	0	1	85

Table S4. Vegetation data from quadrat sampling in the Red Panda habitat with landslide impact.

Quadrate	Betula utilis	Rhododendron sp.	Pinus wallichiana	Total number of trees	Bamboo cover %
Q1	1	4	1	6	75
Q2	1	4	1	6	25
Q3	1	2	1	4	45
Q4	4	1	2	7	55
Q5	7	11	5	23	0
Q6	0	0	5	5	90
Q7	0	1	1	2	45
Q8	0	1	1	2	80
Q9	1	2	0	3	75
Q10	0	1	0	1	66
Q11	3	0	0	3	75
Q12	0	4	2	6	25
Q13	0	1	0	1	45
Q14	1	1	0	2	10
Q15	1	0	0	1	5
Q16	2	0	0	2	5
Q17	3	0	0	3	5
Q18	0	1	0	1	1
Q19	0	0	1	1	10
Q20	0	0	0	0	10
Q21	1	2	0	3	25
Q22	1	3	0	4	10
Q23	1	1	0	2	0
Q24	2	0	0	2	10
Q25	0	0	1	1	0
Q26	0	0	0	0	10
Q27	3	0	0	3	5
Q28	0	1	1	2	30
Q29	1	0	0	1	5
Q30	0	1	0	1	2
Q31	0	0	0	0	5
Q32	1	1	0	2	5
Q33	1	0	0	1	0
Q34	2	0	0	2	0
Q35	1	0	0	1	5
Q36	1	0	0	1	2
Q37	0	1	0	1	2
Q38	1	1	0	2	0
Q39	2	0	0	2	0
Q40	1	0	0	1	2
Q41	0	0	0	0	10
Q42	1	1	0	2	20
Q43	1	0	0	1	45
Q44	0	1	0	1	10
Q45	0	0	0	0	5
Q46	0	1	0	1	5
Q47	0	0	3	3	0
Q48	0	1	1	2	5
Q49	0	0	1	1	5
Q50	0	0	1	1	5
Q51	1	1	0	2	0
Q52	1	0	1	2	0
Q53	1	0	0	1	0
Q54	1	0	0	1	0
Q55	1	0	0	1	0
Q56	11	3	0	14	0
Q57	3	1	0	5	0
Q58	7	1	0	8	5
Q59	1	0	0	2	0
Q60	3	0	0	3	0
Q61	2	1	0	3	5
Q62	3	0	0	3	15
Q63	2	0	0	2	0
Q64	1	0	1	2	2
Q65	3	1	0	4	10
Q66	3	1	0	4	5
Q67	2	1	0	3	5
Q68	3	0	0	3	0
Q69	0	1	0	1	5
Q70	2	1	0	3	5