34 Introduction Northeast India is considered a high-priority area for Asian elephant conservation (Choudhury 1999; Sukumar 2006) with a particular need for the mitigation of human-elephant conflict (HEC) (Gureja et al. 2002). The forests of the Himalayan foothills contain one of the last remaining viable elephant populations and also one of the most acutely threatened (Sukumar & Santiapillai 1996; Choudhury 1999). Estimates for the wild elephant population in Assam vary but are believed to be in the order of around 5,000, which represents around 20% of India’s total wild elephant population and 10-15% of the global Asian elephant population (cf Project Elephant Synchronised Census 2002, IUCN 2008, Sukumar 2003). Assam, therefore, is one of the most important strongholds for the survival of the Asian elephant. However, in Assam, unsustainable extraction of forest products and encroachment of forests for agriculture are fragmenting habitat, the most visible and immediate effect of which is direct conflict between elephants and people (Kushwaha & Hazarika 2004). This conflict has become an annual occurrence which results not only in loss of crops, but also destruction of property and loss of human lives, and in turn, retaliation against elephants. An indicator of the severity of this conflict is seen in the response of the affected communities, many of which, despite revering elephants in their culture (e.g. Ganesha in Hinduism) have taken to poisoning and electrocuting elephants in desperate attempts to protect their lives and livelihoods (Gureja et al. 2002). A series of elephant poisonings in 2001 attracted extensive media attention and raised awareness of the severity of HEC in Assam. Between 1997 and 2001 there were 208 human and 175 elephant deaths in Assam as a result of the conflict (Gureja et al. 2002). For the long-term, landscape-scale strategies for habitat restoration and elephant conservation are essential, but these are conceptually and politically challenging to devise and take many years to implement. Meanwhile community tolerance of elephants is deteriorating, threatening to undermine larger-scale conservation efforts. Addressing this is precisely the objective of human-wildlife conflict mitigation: to prevent community tolerance of wildlife from deteriorating in order to buy time for the development of long- term solutions. In 2004, the UK-based North of England Zoological Society (which runs Chester Zoo) joined forces with the Assam-based NGO EcoSystems-India to create the Assam Haathi Project for human-elephant conflict mitigation (www.assamhaathiproject.org), which received funding from the UK Government’s “Darwin Initiative” in 2007 (Defra 2008). The project uses a community-based approach to integrate research and monitoring with conflict mitigation and the protection of livelihoods. In this paper we describe our approach as a case study for effective approaches to human-elephant conflict mitigation. Study area The state of Assam in Northeast India has an area of 78,438 km 2 and a human population of over 26 million people (Census of India, 2001). Our project works in two districts, called Sonitpur and Goalpara (Fig. 1), which are particularly prone to frequent and severe cases of HEC. Within these Gajah 30 (2009) 34-40 Community-Based Human-Elephant Conflict Management in Assam Alexandra Zimmermann 1,2 , Tammy E. Davies 1 , Nandita Hazarika 3 , Scott Wilson 1 , Joydeep Chakrabarty 3 , Bhaben Hazarika 3 and Dhruba Das 3 1 North of England Zoological Society, Chester Zoo, Chester, UK 2 Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK 3 EcoSystems-India, Guwahati, Assam, India