At the heart of the TTF's numerous recommendations is the premise that 's forests are not a vast wilderness, but have been traditionally used by people. This is easily demonstrable on the ground, but has been missing from conservation policies.

The National Wildlife Action Plan 2002, did partially introduce this premise, but it has remained unimplemented. This ground truth necessitates a new direction for conservation, in which both the protection of wild species and the livelihoods of local people become crucial.

The TTF recommends speedy relocation from areas scientifically determined to be critical for the tiger. But it also points out the impractica-lity of moving out all settlements: In 30 years, only 80 out of the estimated 1,500 villages in tiger reserves, have been relocated.

And it concludes that communities that will remain inside such habitats, need clear resource use rights. For some reason the report does not stress that such rights are a matter not only of necessity but also of justice, for in most cases communities have existed before the tiger reserves were declared.

This fact points to the horrendous implications of recent Supreme Court orders, as interpreted by the ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) and the centrally em-powered committee, which direct state governments to virtually negate all rights of people within protected areas.

These orders could lead to mass evictions and impoverishment, potentially of 3.5-4 million people. Injustice is one result, another is creating even more enemies of conservation. For a majority of wildlife habitats in , coexistence is inevitable.

But not with universal prescriptions, which have dominated the conservation Vs people debate so far. Site-specific strategies are needed, with clear focus on meeting conservation priorities in critical wildlife habitats.

In particular, commercial uses such as of non-timber forest produce, do tend to go dangerously haywire if not strongly regulated. But a complete ban on them (as mandated by the Wildlife Act) is unnecessary and unscientific.

The TTF report justifiably recommends steps to understand what human uses are proving to be detrimental, and what are within conservation limits. It also lists several possibilities for livelihood security, including income from tourism, sustainable harvest, and payment for ecological services rendered by forests.

This has already worked in places like Periyar Tiger Reserve (through forest department initiatives), Tawa reservoir (through local people's cooperatives) and other places. Evolving relocation and coexistence strategies over the next year are the most important follow-up actions of the TTF.

In this, two aspects weakly dealt with by the TTF need attention. Villages remaining within wildlife habitats will need not only livelihoods, but also inputs on health, education and communications. Conservationists rightly point to the dangers inherent in conventional-style development coming deep into forest areas.

Villages inside wildlife habitats could become the country's primary attempt at evolving a different developmental paradigm.

Alternate energy sources that do not need transmission lines cutting through forests, schools built on traditional learning traditions supplemented with modern ones, health facilities combining the best of traditional and modern medical care, wireless communication systems, and so on.

This approach has proved successful in Nagaland, Biligiri sanctuary in Karnataka and Mendha Lekha in Maharashtra. Across the world, it has been demonstrated that management powers and responsibilities, along with secure tenurial rights, are the keys to long-term conservation.

Such a joint manage-ment paradigm has been the most critical gap in 's conservation policy. The TTF has recommended joint management committees for each protected area, but legal changes are needed for clear sharing of authority.

The report has overlooked wildlife conservation outside officially designated protected areas (PAs). There is, after all, much more wildlife outside 's PAs than within.

An enterprising forest officer in Vidarbha has shown that a vigilant forest staff and local support can help reduce poaching, and sustain tiger populations even in the midst of human-populated areas.

Detailed recommendations for wildlife conservation outside PAs are contained in the draft National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, which has remained a draft for almost two years in the MoEF.

The TTF has missed a historic opportunity to secure critical wildlife habitats against their biggest threat: Large-scale development projects. Imagine if it had got the PMO to agree to keep such habitats out of bounds of large-scale mining, damming, industrialisation, expressways and ports, and urbanisation?

The National Wildlife Action Plan recom-mended a five-km safety radius around protected areas, but this remains unimplemented.

This is an issue that has helped build bridges between conservationists and human rights activists; both agree that the single biggest enemy of both wildlife and local communities is such destructive development.

The writer is a member of Kalpavriksh Environmental Action Group, Pune .