At a Tiger Task Force (TTF) meeting held in Nagpur on June 12, it is alleged, the discussion centred on how the tiger's forests can be used - or rather abused - by the people. The tiger was missing from the agenda. The whole purpose, it seems, was not how the people could help the tiger, but how tiger could help the people.

Things have come to such a head that conservationists are writing to the Prime Minister that the task force is failing in its purpose. They would also like to bring to the notice of the Prime Minister that the chairperson, Sunita Narian, wears her bias on her sleeve, the bias being that forests and tigers can be well managed by local people and not officers and law. "With such an attitude it will be impossible to come up with any concrete steps to save the tiger when the report is due in mid-July," said a forest officer present at the Nagpur meeting.

"The meeting made it clear that the task force has become just a front and a means to push the Tribal Land Rights Bill, 2005," Debi Goenka of Bombay Environmental Action Group said. "The issue under discussion was how to barter forest land to tribals."

"The invite mentioned that people and forests would be discussed. Nowhere did it say that it would be the only issue that would be discussed," Mr Goenka added.

"The problem is, the meeting did not even discuss people's participation in conservation, just their rights over the forests. The right to extract tendu, timber and other forest produce," Bittu Sahgal, editor, Sanctuary Asia said. "Wildlifers are not anti-people, but we have to see how local people can protect forests and their livelihood can be sustained; not how they former can exploit the forests."

When questioned, Ms Narian reasserted her stand that forests were meant for tribal use. "Of course, the meeting was dominated by issues concerning tribals and how forests can be used by them, because it was meant to be." However, she added that at the previous two meetings, she had discussed issues concerning tiger conservation and the agenda here was only people and parks.

The meeting held at Nagpur represents prime contiguous tiger habitat of Melghat, Pench, Kanha and Satpura Tiger Reserve, vital to tiger conservation. These areas are also very vulnerable to poaching since Nagpur is a major centre for illegal trade in wildlife and Pardhis, a traditional hunting tribe operate in these parts. However, the TTF saw it fit to keep the cat in question absent from the agenda.

At least three conservationists, who had been invited for discussions waited for over six hours for discussions before they walked out. "We were told that Melghat would be discussed but we waited for over six hours and then walked out. She wasn't interested," said Kishore Rithe of Satpura Foundation, who told Ms Narain that it would be more appropriate to call the group Tribal Task Force.

On this, Ms Narian said, "We do not know why some conservationists left the meeting. All we know is that they were requested to wait, but expressed their inability to do so. Why don't you find out."

It is not just wildlife supporters questioning the TTF, differences have cropped up among the members. Ms Narian's expertise on tiger conservation issues has been questioned as is her pro-people approach to tiger protection, especially at a time when escalating poaching has deepened the tiger crisis, and strict protection is the need of the hour. Her views are in sharp contradiction to that of tiger expert and task force colleague Valmik Thapar, who has made public that the Bill, in its current form, will spell the death of wildlife.

In another significant development, highly placed sources in the Ministry of Environment and Forests said that on the request from Sonia Gandhi's office, suggestions to the Bill have been given personally to Mrs Gandhi. As reported in The Pioneer, MoEF had strongly opposed the Bill. This request, it is believed, followed the controversy that the Bill would destroy huge chunks of forest in India. Reportedly, Rahul Gandhi, a member Tiger and Wilderness Watch, a wildlife group of MPs, had strong reservations on the Bill and its impact on tiger habitat.

According to sources, the basic tenants of the suggestions on the Bill given to Mrs Gandhi does away with the provision that 2.5 hectares of land be given to each tribal nuclear family, but also assures that tribals will not be evicted from forest land, unless they voluntarily sought relocation.

In tiger reserves and national parks, the policy of rehabilitation of forest villages would continue. The most significant change sought, however, is that if enacted, it should not override the Wildlife Protection Act and the Forest Conservation Act. It also provides for sustainable use of minor forest produce for tribals.