http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 20 Dec 2011 IP address: 163.1.80.173 Habitat loss and human–elephant conﬂict in Assam, India: does a critical threshold exist? L aura C hartier ,A lexandra Z immermann and R ichard J.L adle Abstract Human–elephant conﬂict in India, driven by habitat loss and an expanding human population, is a complex challenge for biodiversity conservation. De- termining if, how and why this conﬂict has changed over time will be an important step towards managing land- scapes where people and elephants Elephas maximus coexist. This study combines social surveys and remote sensing data to analyse patterns in human–elephant conﬂict and land-use change over time. The reported experience of conﬂict increased dramatically in the early 1980s, with 85% of those surveyed indicating that conﬂict began after 1980. The expansion of conﬂict showed a signiﬁcant southward trend and was associated with forest cover dropping below 30–40%. Based on our results we propose that a critical habitat threshold for human–elephant conﬂict may exist at 30–40% forest cover. Below this level, conﬂict expanded across the landscape. The existence of such a deforestation threshold may have important implications for landscape management in elephant range states that seek to avoid or mitigate further conﬂict. Maintenance of remaining forest areas, reforestation, and the creation of habitat corridors are strategies that could help prevent further expansion of conﬂict. Keywords Assam, deforestation, habitat loss, habitat thresh- old, human–elephant conﬂict, human–wildlife conﬂict, India This paper contains supplementary material that can be found online at http://journals.cambridge.org Introduction T he global loss of wild habitats and the expansion of human populations have intensiﬁed conﬂicts between people and wildlife (Hoare, 2000; Balmford & Whitten, 2003; Dublin & Hoare, 2004; Woodroffe et al., 2005). India provides a dramatic example of such conﬂict, with the human population—with an average growth rate of 2% per year between 1950 and 2000 (UN, 2004)—coming increasingly into contact with wildlife such as the Asian elephant Elephas maximus, which is categorized as Endangered on the IUCN Red List (Choudhury, 2008). Intensifying land uses have led to degradation, fragmentation and loss of elephant habitat, and have driven elephants into contact with people, particularly in cultivated areas. Conﬂict be- tween elephants and people results when elephants feed on crops, destroy farms or homes, or injure or kill people, and when people retaliate against these losses (Sukumar, 1994; Inskip & Zimmermann, 2009). Sonitpur District, in the state of Assam in north-east India, has been referred to as a ground zero for human–elephant conﬂict (Kvinta, 2004). An estimated 60% of the elephants in Sonitpur and adjoining districts have disappeared in the last 5 years, many from poisoning (Kushwaha & Hazarika, 2004), and there have been many human deaths caused by elephants. Finding ways for people and elephants to coexist will, therefore, be critical to the success of conservation efforts that seek to balance the needs of people and wildlife (Adams, 2004). Conﬂict between people and elephants (or human– elephant conﬂict, hereinafter referred to as conﬂict) is not a new phenomenon; records exist of elephant crop raiding in Asia as early as 300 BC (Sukumar, 1994). However, community surveys and news reports suggest that conﬂict has been increasing, in both frequency and intensity, in recent decades in Asia and Africa (Kvinta, 2004; Siebert, 2006; Hedges, 2007). After millennia of coexistence it seems a shift may have occurred in the human–elephant interface, perhaps in as little as a few decades (Hoare, 2000), which has driven conﬂict to intolerable levels. Some argue, however, that it is merely our perception of conﬂict that is increasing and that the conﬂict itself is of a similar intensity to that of the past (Lee & Graham, 2006). Determining whether conﬂict has increased in recent years was one aim of this study. The second aim was to examine when or where such an increase may have taken place by examining patterns in conﬂict over time. Researchers have called the identiﬁca- tion of thresholds, or points of rapid change from one ecological condition to another, a priority for conserva- tionists, especially in tropical areas where biodiversity is fast eroding (du Toit et al., 2004). A small additional loss of habitat, if it occurs at or near the habitat threshold for a species, can have large effects on the extinction risk of a population (Andren, 1994; With & Crist, 1995; Fahrig, 2001; Huggett, 2005) and is therefore of particular concern for the management of threatened species. LAURA CHARTIER* (Corresponding author) and RICHARD J. LADLE School of Geography and the Environment, Oxford University, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX13PS, UK. E-mail laura.chartier@gmail.com ALEXANDRA ZIMMERMANN Conservation Department, North of England Zoological Society, Chester Zoo, Chester, UK, and Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Oxford University, Tubney, UK *Current address: 526 M St, Anchorage, AK 99501, USA Received 18 September 2010. Revision requested 5 November 2010. Accepted 22 December 2010. ª 2011 Fauna & Flora International, Oryx, 45(4), 528–533 doi:10.1017/S0030605311000044