GAJAH
NUMBER 28
2008
Journal of the Asian Elephant Specialist Group
1
GAJAH
Journal of the Asian Elephant Specialist Group
Number 28 (2008)
The journal is intended as a medium of communication on issues that concern the management and
conservation of Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) both in the wild and in captivity. It is a means by
which members of the AsESG and others can communicate their experiences, ideas and perceptions
freely, so that the conservation of Asian elephants can benefit. All articles published in Gajah reflect
the individual views of the authors and not necessarily that of the editorial board or the AsESG.
Editor
Jayantha Jayewardene
Biodiversity and Elephant Conservation Trust
615/32 Rajagiriya Gardens
Nawala Road, Rajagiriya
Sri Lanka
romalijj@eureka.lk
Editorial Board
Dr. Prithiviraj Fernando
Centre for Conservation and Research
35 Gunasekara Gardens
Nawala Road, Rajagiriya
Sri Lanka
e-mail: pruthu62@gmail.com
A. T. J. Johnsingh
101 Magnolia, Esteem Gardenia
Sahakara Nagar
Bangalore 92
India
e-mail: ajt.johnsingh@gmail.com
Heidi Riddle
Riddles Elephant & Wildlife Sanctuary
P.O.Box 715
Greenbrier, Arkansas 72058
USA
e-mail: gajah@alltel.net
Dr. Alex Rübel
Direktor Zoo Zürich
Zürichbergstrasse 221
CH - 8044 Zürich
Switzerland
e-mail: alex.ruebel@zoo.ch
Arnold Sitompul
Conservation Science Initiative
Jl. Setia Budi Pasar 2
Komp. Insan Cita Griya Blok CC No 5
Medan, 20131
Indonesia
e-mail:asitompu@forwild.umass.edu
Dr. A. Christy Williams
WWF Nepal Program
P.O. Box 7660
Baluwatar, Kathmnadu
Nepal
e-mail: acwill69@yahoo.com
Gajah 28 (2008) 25-30
A Geo-Spatial Assessment of Habitat Loss of Asian Elephants
in Golaghat District of Assam
Pranjit K. Sarma, Bibhab K. Talukdar, Jayanta K. Baruah, Bibhuti P. Lahkar and Nirupam Hazarika
Aaranyak, Guwahati, Assam, India
Introduction
The state of Assam is regarded as one of the
strongholds of Asian elephant conservation
(Stracey 1963; Santiapillai & Jackson 1990;
Choudhury 1999; Bist 2002), with about 5,200
elephants as assessed in 2005 by the Assam
Forest Department. In comparison, the total
Indian elephant population numbers about
26,400. The forest areas of Golaghat and Karbi
Anglong districts are one of the richest forest
covers with outstanding biodiversity values. The
forest areas of Golaghat and adjoining areas of
the Karbi Anglong districts are represented by
the Nambor-Doigrung Wildlife Sanctuary (120
km2), Garampani Wildlife Sanctuary (6 km2)
and Nambor Wildlife Sanctuary (37 km2). These
sanctuaries are also part of the Kaziranga-Karbi
Anglong Elephant Reserve, declared on 17 April
2003, with an estimated area of 3,270 km2.
The forest areas of Golaghat district play a
major role in the conservation of elephants in the
Kaziranga-Karbi Anglong Landscape. Massive
shrinkage and fragmentation of natural habitat
due to illegal human settlement, and opening
up for tea industry are major anthropogenic
disturbances that have contributed enormously
towards the total destruction of elephant habitats
in Golaghat district. Moreover, the killing of wild
elephants for ivory and meat has led to a decline
in elephant populations in these areas since 1980
(Lahiri Choudhury 1980). Growing animosity
between humans and elephants has increased
tremendously resulting in massive humanelephant conflict that has shattered the age-old
co-existence of humans and elephants (Talukdar
et al. 2006).
In view of the increased human-elephant conflict,
we undertook a study on the loss of forest cover
since 1974, in the Golaghat district in Assam,
25
excluding the Kaziranga National Park (430 km2).
The study was based on satellite images of the
areas in 1974, 1991 and 2004, and intense ground
assessment of the current forest cover, to find out
the relationship between habitat loss of elephants
and subsequent increases in human-elephant
conflict in Golaghat district. We used remote
sensing and GIS technologies for analyzing and
estimating loss of Asian elephant habitat due
to deforestation and encroachment in the moist
deciduous and semi-evergreen forests.
Methods
Study area
We selected eight Reserve Forests of Golaghat
district of Assam (Fig. 1, Table 1). The study
area is about 942 km2 of the 3,588 km2 total
area of Golaghat district. We excluded the area
of Kaziranga National Park (380 km2) and the
Panbari RF (12 km2) area because these areas are
properly protected and there is no massive forest
degradation noticed in these areas in the recent
past. The latitudinal and longitudinal extension of
our study area is from 25°45’ to 26°30’N latitude
and 93°45’ to 94°05’E longitude. The average
annual rainfall is between 2,000-2,300 mm, and
average temperature in the winter season is 8°C
which rises to 37°C in summer. Relative humidity
varies from 60% in March to 95% in July. These
Table 1. Reserve forests (RF) of the study area.
# Name
Area [km2]
1 Doyang RF
252.93
2 Nambor South RF
236.86
3 Diphu RF
165.25
4 Rengma
150.90
5 Nambor North RF
93.15
6 Disma RF
20.15
7 Lower Doiugurung RF
13.54
8 Upper Doigurung RF
9.30
Figure 1. Location map of the study area in Gree.
reserve forests were once ideal habitat for Asian
elephants (Choudhury 1999).
Data set used
For this study the primary data used were serial
satellite images, Survey of India (SOI) topography
maps, ground control points (GCPs) and other
spatial data that includes forest boundary maps
available with state forest department and also
sketch maps of forest areas available with the
State Revenue Department. The satellite images
used in this study are Landsat MSS imagery of
1974, Landsat TM imagery of 1991 and IRS 1D
LISS III imagery of 2004 (Table 2). The Survey
of India topography maps no. 83F/6, 83F/10,
83F/13, 83F/14, 83F/15, 83F/16, 83G/13, 83J/2,
83J/3 and 83J/4 (1:50,000) and 83F, 83J, and
83F (1:250,000) were used for geo-referencing
of satellite images. In addition, a base map and
the vector layers i.e. district boundary, forest
boundary and drainage available within the study
area were prepared.
26
Methodology
Landsat MSS, Landsat Thematic Mapper and
IRS 1D LISS-III digital data pertaining to 1974,
1991 and 2004 were used to assess the forest
cover changes within the eight Reserve Forests
of Golaghat district of Assam. Survey of India
(SOI) topographical maps at 1:50,000 and
1:250,000 scale and Forest Survey of India (FSI)
reports for Assam were also consulted and used
as collateral data. Ground truthing was done
from October 2005 to September 2006. Landsat
MSS, Landsat-TM scene and IRS 1D LISSIII were radiometrically corrected using the
dark pixel subtraction technique (Kushwaha &
Hazarika 2004). They were then geo-referenced
with Survey of India topographical maps using
the Polyconic projection system. The Polyconic
Table 2. Satellite data used for the study.
Data type
Path/row
Date
Landsat MSS
144,145-42
26.1.1974
Landsat TM
134,135-43
28.1.1991
IRS 1D LISS III 112,113-53
22.12.2004
projection system was used because the Survey
of India topographical maps were based on that
projection. As the Golaghat district does not come
under a single scene of the satellite images, we
constructed a mosaic using the relevant satellite
scenes. We took well-identified ground control
points (GCP) with the help of a Garmin 72 GPS
receiver to rectify the satellite images. Sub-pixel
image to map registration accuracy was achieved
through repeated attempts. The district image
was extracted by superimposing the vector layer
of the district boundary of Golaghat district.
Similarly the forest area of Golaghat district
since 1974 was extracted by superimposing the
forest boundary vectorised from Survey of India
(SOI) topographical sheets. The three period
images were then visually interpreted on-screen
using supervised classification, using green, red
and near infrared band combination. Training
sites were made by demarcating a polygon for
the known cover types that were later applied
to the entire image. A classification scheme was
developed using maximum likelihood algorithm
and the overall number of classes in each case
was kept constant. The visually interpreted
images were superimposed to detect changes
from one period to the other. All operations were
carried out using ERDAS IMAGINE 9.0 version
software.
Results and discussion
Assessment of habitat loss
The Golaghat district of Assam was once famous
for its thick forest cover and also as a prime habitat
of the endangered Asian elephant (Choudhury
1999). The oldest reserve forest of Assam exists
in the Golaghat district. In 1872, the Nambor
Reserve Forest was declared with an area of 875.5
km2. In 1965, for better management, a part of
Nambor Reserve Forest was declared as Nambor
South Reserve Forest with an area of 199.57 km2.
In 2003, the Upper and Lower Doigrung Reserve
Forests along with an additional area of 120 km2
were included to form the Nambor-Doigrung
Wildlife Sanctuary. A large portion of forest cover
of Golaghat district has been encroached and
deforested. The forest cover change in Golaghat
district is summarized in Table 3.
The Nambor-Doigurung Wildlife Sanctuary
faces large-scale encroachments, which have
occurred from 1980 onwards. As a result, the
total forest cover area of Nambor-Doigurung
Wildlife Sanctuary has been reduced from 120
km2 to 54.08 km2 (55%). The balance 66 km2
area has been encroached by human populations.
Figure 2 shows the encroachment of forest cover
in Nambor-Doigurung Wildlife Sanctuary. The
same scenario is seen in Diphu RF, Rengma RF,
Doyang RF, and Nambor South RF of Golaghat
district. These areas were once some of the best
elephant habitats in South Asia (Choudhury
1999). Reserve forests like Doyang, Rengma,
Diphu, and Nambor South, have been totally
encroached during 1974-2004 and currently
only 3.38% of forest cover exists in Doyang RF,
4.86% in Rengma RF, 1.97% in Diphu RF and
0.07% in Nambor South RF. One can see these
areas are now full of villages, small tea gardens,
agricultural practices, shops, etc.
Out of 1,037.94 km2 of Reserve Forest in Golaghat
forest division, only 167.94 km2 (16.18%) now
remains undisturbed. Figure 3 shows the current
status of forest cover in the Golaghat District.
Table 3. Forest cover change in the study area.
Forest
Doyang RF
Rengma RF
Nambor South RF
Diphu RF
Disma RF
Nambor North RF
Upper Doigurung RF
Lower Doigurung RF
Forest cover [km2]
1974
1991
2004
93.35
4.21
3.16
123.63
17.52
6.02
199.57
0.15
0.15
118.12
7.74
2.33
0.02
0.47
0.22
67
50.51
30.19
8.62
7.71
6.67
13.07
11.49
10.93
27
Change [%]
1974-1991
1991-2004
-95.45
-24.94
-85.31
-65.64
-99.92
0
-93.45
-70.02
+2250.00
-53.19
-24.61
-40.23
-10.55
-13.49
-12.09
-4.87
Figure 2. False colour images of Golaghat district pertaining to periods a) 1974, b) 1991 and c) 2004.
Red colour indicates the forest cover.
The change in land use in Golaghat district is
evident between 1974 to 1991 and 1991 to 2004
(Fig. 4 and Table 4). The forest cover in the
southern part of Golaghat district is completely
gone, leading to intense human-elephant conflict
in the district.
Causes of forest loss
The main causes of elephant habitat loss in
Golaghat district are:
• Land use change from forest to agricultural
land and tea gardens.
• Encroachment by human populations from
nearby villages.
• Use of wood as a source of heat and
energy.
• Illegal cutting and felling of trees for
business purposes.
Human-elephant conflict
The Asian elephant is considered one of the most
significant cultural symbols of the people of Asia,
and also stands for the need to safeguard sufficient
natural forest areas. However the species is
endangered due to a number of conservation
issues. Growing human populations, demand for
cultivable lands and alteration of forest habitat to
human habitation and cropland result in serious
human-elephant conflict in Assam (Srivastava et
al. 2002; Talukdar & Barman 2003). The forest
cover in northeastern India is disappearing at
an alarming rate. More than 500 km2 of forests
are being destroyed annually (Choudhury 1999).
This has resulted in increase of human-elephant
conflict to alarming proportions in Assam in
general, and in the Golaghat district of Assam in
particular, in recent times (Talukdar & Barman
2004). During harvesting season, wild elephants
Figure 3. Forest cover change in the study area. Forest cover in 1974 (a), 1991 (b) and 2004 (c).
28
Figure 4. Land use in the study area in 1974 (a), 1991 (b) and 2004 (c).
come out of the existing forest area to nearby
villages in search of food and increase the levels
of depredation in crop fields giving rise to serious
human-elephant conflict situations. The economy
of the district as a whole is mainly agro-based,
wherein the people basically cultivate paddy as
their main livelihood. On the other hand paddy
attracts elephants, which ultimately creates loss
of farmers’ annual food and income. This leads to
human-elephant conflict, which results in the loss
of human and elephant lives. The large-scale loss
of crops and an increase in the numbers of human
casualties by wild elephants has disturbed the
age-old peaceful bond of co-habitation between
humans and elephants, resulting in humans
killing elephants in vengeance. The number
of human casualties by wild elephants, and the
number of elephant deaths as a result of humanelephant conflict in Golaghat district is shown in
the following graph (Fig. 5).
Conclusion
In recent years, development activities such as
establishment of the Numalighar Refinery in the
Telgaram area, widening of the national highway,
and increasing tea estates and encroachments
has led to fragmentation of elephant habitats.
Further, extraction of stones from forests of
Behora, Mikirchang, Bogidola and Lakowa
area has minimized the free ranging movement
of elephants in Golaghat district, leading to a
chaotic situation. The present status of elephants
in Golaghat is in complete contrast to the past.
The only solution to minimize elephant habitat
loss and human elephant conflict is the restoration
of key forest cover and elephant corridors. All
encroachers should be evicted from the areas
with immediate effect as per the existing Forest
Conservation Act of 1980, and a rehabilitation
plan needs to be prepared for the encroachers.
Stringent measures should be adopted to check
any further deforestation in the existing forest
cover of the Golaghat district. The entire area
should be regularly monitored using remote
sensing to detect the loss of elephant habitat due to
human activities or any natural disaster. The need
of the hour is to initiate a concerted approach by
involving all the relevant stakeholders and work
collectively to ensure that tangible results could
be achieved in the field of elephant conservation
through community participation and better
forest-public relationship. Restoration of forest
cover seems to be the only permanent solution
for the burgeoning problem. However, in the
short run, as immediate measures, crop guarding,
chasing wild elephants by using domesticated
Table 4. Land use change in the study area.
Class Name
Area [km2]
Net change [km2]
1974
1991
2004
1974-1991 1991-2004
Forest
623.38
99.8 59.67
-523.58
-40.13
Cropland
282.18 805.76 839.8
523.58
34.04
Water body
36.52
36.52 42.62
0
6.1
29
Change [%]
1974-1991 1991-2004
-83.99
-40.21
185.55
4.22
0
16.70
Figure 5. Intensity of human-elephant conflict in Golaghat district.
elephants and the use of fire torches would be
helpful. The primary stakeholders need to be
provided with alternative livelihood generating
options so that they could tolerate the possible
damage caused by wild herds, at least in the short
term. The general public needs to extend their full
support to such collective initiatives and play an
active part to minimize human-elephant conflict
in the area through restoration of forests as far as
feasible.
Elephant: An Action Plan for its Conservation.
IUCN/SSC Action Plans, Gland.
References
Talukdar, B.K & Barman, R. (2003) Manelephant conflict in Assam, India: is there any
solution? Gajah 22: 50-56
Bist, S.S. (2002) Conservation of elephants in NE
India: Past, present and future. Newsletter of the
Rhino Found. for Nature in NE India 4: 7-10.
Choudhury, A.U. (1999) Status and conservation
of the Asian elephant Elephas maximus in northeastern India. Mammal Review 29: 141-173.
Lahiri Choudhury, D.K. (1980) An interim report
on the status and distribution if elephants in northeast India. In: The Status of the Asian Elephant
in the Indian Sub-Continent. Daniel, J.C. (ed.)
IUCN/SSC Report, BNHS, Bombay. pp. 43-58.
Kushwaha, S.P.S. & Hazarika, R. (2004)
Assessment of habitat loss in Kamengand
Sonitpur Elephant Reserves. Current Science 87:
1447-1453.
Santiapillai, C. & Jackson, P. (1990) The Asian
30
Srivastava, S., Singh, T.P., Singh, H., Kushwaha,
S.P.S. & Roy, P.S. (2002) Assessment of largescale deforestation in Sonitpur district of Assam.
Current Science 82: 1479-1484.
Stracey, P.D. (1963) Elephant Gold. Weidenfeld
and Nicolson, London.
Talukdar, B.K. & Barman, R. (2004) Current state
of man-elephant conflict in Assam: Solution still
elusive. In: Endangered Elephants, Past, Present
and Future. Jayewardene, J. (ed.) Biodiversity
& Elephant Conservation Trust, Colombo, Sri
Lanka. pp 77-81.
Talukdar, B.K., Boruah, J.K. & Sarma, P. (2006)
Multi-dimensional mitigation initiatives to
human-elephant conflicts in Golaghat district and
adjoining areas of Karbi Anglong, Assam, India.
In: Proceedings of the International Elephant
Conservation and Research Symposium.
Copenhagen Zoo. pp 197-204.
Corresponding author’s e-mail:
bibhab@aaranyak.org