Leopard Conservation in Uganda: Status and Action in 2026

Last reviewed August 2026. Conservation data changes — see the cited sources for the latest figures.

Why leopard conservation matters in Uganda

Uganda is an important country for large-carnivore conservation because it still contains a network of savannah, woodland, forest and wetland landscapes managed for wildlife. Leopards are adaptable predators, but they need sufficient habitat, prey and cover, and they can come into conflict with people when protected areas become isolated or livestock losses occur.

The species is difficult to count. Leopards are solitary, wide-ranging and elusive, so a lack of sightings does not necessarily mean that a population is absent. Uganda’s large-carnivore strategy explicitly states that there was no good measure of leopard population numbers anywhere in the country, although Uganda Wildlife Authority ranger patrols provided useful sighting records from protected areas.

That evidence makes monitoring a conservation priority rather than a technical afterthought. A credible estimate requires repeatable surveys, consistent methods and coverage beyond the most frequently visited parts of a park. A recent collaboration involving more than 100 conservation stakeholders used spatial capture–recapture methods to assess lions, leopards and spotted hyenas across six major protected areas in Uganda. The published summary highlights a serious decline in lions and strong hyena numbers, but it does not provide a national leopard total; that distinction matters when interpreting Uganda’s current conservation picture.

Where are leopards found in Uganda?

Ranger records compiled for Uganda’s large-carnivore strategy recorded leopard sightings in protected areas and identified Queen Elizabeth National Park as a likely national stronghold because sightings there were relatively numerous compared with other sites. This is evidence of importance, not a modern population census.

For travellers planning a wildlife safari, Uganda’s savannah parks offer the most realistic context for understanding leopard conservation. Sightings are never guaranteed, and a responsible safari should be presented as an opportunity to observe wildlife—not as proof that a species is abundant.

Leopard conservation also needs to consider the spaces between parks. The national strategy records regular leopard sightings outside protected areas and notes livestock losses on ranches in western Uganda and across the cattle corridor separating the western Rift from the highlands around Kampala and Masaka. Those records show why conservation cannot depend only on park boundaries.

The main threats to leopards in Uganda

1. Habitat loss and fragmentation

Habitat loss and fragmentation reduce the space available to leopards and can isolate populations. The IUCN Cat Specialist Group lists habitat loss and fragmentation among the main human-driven causes of leopard population reduction. Fragmented landscapes may also reduce genetic exchange: the Cat Specialist Group warns that small, isolated populations can face loss of genetic diversity and possible inbreeding risks.

In Uganda, fragmentation is especially relevant where wildlife habitat meets ranches, farms, settlements and transport routes. The national large-carnivore strategy describes habitat loss as one of the threats affecting Uganda’s large carnivores, alongside inadequate information about population status.

2. Declining prey and bushmeat pressure

Leopards depend on functioning prey communities. The IUCN Cat Specialist Group identifies prey depletion as a major threat, while Uganda’s strategy links the loss of prey species to the bushmeat trade. When prey becomes scarce, leopards may range more widely or take livestock, increasing the likelihood of conflict.

Prey monitoring should therefore be treated as part of leopard conservation. Protecting a leopard without protecting the wider food web would leave the underlying problem unresolved. This is also why large-carnivore planning in Uganda considers lions, leopards and hyenas together rather than managing each predator in isolation.

3. Wire snares, poaching and illegal killing

Uganda’s large-carnivore strategy identifies poaching for body parts, stolen carcasses and accidental capture in traps set for antelopes as threats to large carnivores, including leopards. The IUCN Cat Specialist Group similarly lists persecution, illegal wildlife trade and illegal retaliatory killing among the principal threats to the species.

A national IUCN Save Our Species country brief reports that, between 2020 and 2023, supported conservation work in Uganda helped reduce the direct threat from wire snares from four per 100 square kilometres to fewer than three per 100 square kilometres, with snares becoming more localised. The result is encouraging, but it is not leopard-specific and should not be presented as evidence that leopard populations have recovered. It demonstrates instead the value of sustained patrols, targeted removal of snares and community-linked conservation work.

4. Human–leopard conflict

Leopards can be killed after livestock losses or perceived threats to people. Uganda’s national strategy records retaliatory killing for livestock loss or loss of human life as a threat to large carnivores, and reports leopard-related livestock losses on ranches in western Uganda and along the cattle corridor.

Conflict reduction must be locally designed. Measures may include improved livestock husbandry, rapid reporting, verification of incidents, better protection of kraals and fair processes for communities affected by wildlife. The research supplied for this article does not establish a Uganda-wide total for leopard attacks or retaliatory killings, so claims about the scale of the problem should remain cautious.

5. Climate and shrinking ecological resilience

The IUCN Cat Specialist Group warns that loss of genetic diversity is particularly concerning as climate change adds pressure to increasingly isolated leopard populations. Climate change should therefore be understood as a factor that can intensify existing problems—habitat fragmentation, prey stress and human–wildlife conflict—rather than as a standalone explanation for every local change.

What is being done for leopard conservation?

National large-carnivore planning

Uganda Wildlife Authority’s Strategic Action Plan for Large Carnivore Conservation was developed to address threats to lions, leopards, hyenas and other large carnivores and to help halt declines. The plan brought together available information, assessed threats separately for the main species and identified the country’s limited leopard data as a management challenge.

A more recent multi-stakeholder assessment of six major protected areas used spatial capture–recapture methods for large-carnivore monitoring. Such approaches are important because they can produce stronger estimates than informal sighting counts when survey design and species detections are adequate. For leopards, repeating comparable surveys over time is essential to distinguish a genuine population trend from changes in patrol effort or tourist visibility.

Protected-area patrols and snare reduction

Uganda Wildlife Authority ranger patrols have historically supplied leopard sighting data, particularly in protected areas. Patrols also help detect traps, illegal activity and carcass-related threats. The IUCN country brief reports that supported work reduced wire-snare density in targeted landscapes and involved conservation employment and community participation.

These activities should be assessed by transparent indicators: patrol coverage, snares found and removed, verified conflict cases, prey trends, leopard detections and survival of known individuals where identification is possible. A reduction in recorded incidents may mean fewer threats—or weaker reporting—so monitoring systems need to interpret the numbers carefully.

Research and collaboration

The recent assessment involving more than 100 conservation stakeholders illustrates the collaborative model needed for Uganda’s large carnivores. Government agencies, researchers, conservation organisations, local communities and tourism operators each contribute different information. The best results come when scientific findings are returned to park managers and communities in a form that can guide decisions.

Readers looking for a wider overview can also explore SafariFind’s guide to conservation organisations protecting Uganda’s wildlife. Leopard-specific information remains more limited than the available material for some other Ugandan species, which is another reason to avoid unsupported population claims.

Community conservation and tourism’s role

Leopard conservation will be durable only if people living beside wildlife landscapes are treated as partners and receive fair, practical benefits from conservation. Uganda’s IUCN country brief describes community participation through capacity building, conservation employment and education initiatives. It also reports that more than 600 artisans were trained to create animal sculptures from recovered snares, generating more than $200,000 in direct income; this outcome relates to the wider conservation programme, not specifically to leopards.

Tourism can contribute through park fees, guiding, accommodation, transport, employment and conservation partnerships, but the research supplied here does not quantify the share of tourism revenue attributable to leopard protection. Travellers should therefore ask operators how payments support protected-area management and local communities rather than assuming that every safari automatically funds conservation.

SafariFind’s guide to how safari tourism funds conservation in Uganda provides broader context on that relationship. Travellers can book conservation-supporting safaris on SafariFind, while choosing operators that explain their local partnerships and do not promise guaranteed leopard sightings.

Results and setbacks: what the evidence shows

Evidence	What it means for leopards
Queen Elizabeth National Park had relatively numerous ranger sightings compared with other Ugandan sites.	The park is a likely stronghold, but sightings are not a national population estimate.
Uganda has no good measure of leopard numbers across the country in the cited national strategy.	Population trend claims must be treated cautiously and monitoring should be strengthened.
Spatial capture–recapture research assessed large carnivores across six major protected areas.	Uganda is improving the scientific basis for carnivore management, although the supplied summary does not give a leopard total.
Wire-snare threat fell from four to fewer than three per 100 km² in supported landscapes between the reported baseline and 2023.	Threat reduction is measurable, but the result is not proof of leopard population recovery.
Uganda’s conservation programmes report community employment, education and livelihoods work.	Conservation is more likely to endure when local people participate and benefit.

The central setback is the evidence gap. Uganda can identify important landscapes and major threats, but it cannot yet support a precise, current national leopard population figure from the sources reviewed here. That uncertainty should encourage investment in monitoring, not optimistic speculation.

How travellers can help leopards responsibly

• Choose a licensed operator that follows Uganda Wildlife Authority rules and supports legitimate protected-area management.
• Do not pressure guides to approach, surround or bait a leopard for photographs.
• Keep noise and vehicle movement low, and maintain the distance requested by the guide or park authorities.
• Ask how the safari contributes to local employment, conservation or community partnerships.
• Do not buy leopard skins, claws, teeth or other wildlife products.
• Support conservation organisations that publish clear objectives, methods and results.
• Share sightings responsibly; sensitive location information can increase pressure on vulnerable wildlife.

Responsible tourism cannot replace strong law enforcement, habitat planning or community-led conflict reduction. It can, however, reward operators and destinations that treat wildlife protection as a long-term responsibility rather than a promise of guaranteed encounters.

Conclusion

Leopard conservation in Uganda in 2026 is best described as a protection and knowledge challenge. Leopards persist in important landscapes, with Queen Elizabeth National Park identified as a likely stronghold, but the country still lacks a dependable national population estimate. The practical agenda is clear: improve monitoring, protect habitat and prey, reduce snares and illegal killing, and make coexistence with livestock owners safer and fairer. Progress in wider conservation programmes—including reduced snare density and stronger community participation—is valuable, but it must not be confused with proof that Uganda’s leopard population is increasing.

For the latest information, consult Uganda Wildlife Authority and the cited scientific and conservation sources before travelling or making conservation claims.

Frequently Asked Questions

How many leopards are left in Uganda in 2026?

There is no reliable current national estimate in the cited research. Uganda’s large-carnivore strategy states that leopard numbers were not well measured, although ranger sightings identify important protected areas.

Where is the best place to see leopards in Uganda?

Queen Elizabeth National Park is the strongest evidence-based candidate in the supplied research because ranger sightings were relatively numerous there compared with other Ugandan sites. Sightings are not guaranteed.

Are leopards endangered in Uganda?

The supplied research does not provide a Uganda-specific Red List assessment or national category. It documents serious threats, including habitat loss, prey depletion, persecution, illegal trade, retaliatory killing and snaring.

What are the biggest threats to leopards in Uganda?

The principal documented threats are habitat loss and fragmentation, declining prey, poaching and illegal wildlife trade, retaliatory killing after livestock losses, and accidental capture in wire snares.

Does Uganda have a leopard conservation programme?

Uganda has a Strategic Action Plan for Large Carnivore Conservation covering leopards alongside lions, hyenas and other large carnivores. Research and protected-area patrols support this broader conservation framework.

Has leopard conservation in Uganda been successful?

There are encouraging wider conservation results, including a reported reduction in wire-snare density from four to fewer than three per 100 square kilometres in supported landscapes. The result is not leopard-specific and does not prove a national leopard recovery.

How does tourism help leopard conservation in Uganda?

Tourism can support protected-area management, guiding, accommodation, transport, employment and community partnerships, but the cited research does not quantify how much tourism revenue is directed specifically to leopards.

Can I see a leopard on a Uganda wildlife safari?

You may see a leopard in Uganda’s savannah protected areas, especially in landscapes where ranger records indicate regular sightings, but no ethical operator can guarantee an encounter.

What should I do if I see a leopard on safari?

Remain quiet, follow your guide’s instructions, keep the required distance and do not ask the driver to chase, surround or bait the animal for a photograph.

How can local communities help protect leopards?

Community participation can include conservation employment, education, reporting of threats and practical conflict-reduction measures. Uganda’s supported programmes include community capacity building and conservation livelihoods.