By Lucia Rodriguez

Conservation, the protection of something, an attempt to make it last longer.

In the case of Corbett national park, it’s the conservation of the tiger, who received big amounts of land for him to live freely. Land for him move, for him to eat, for him to sleep. But who else needs conserving?

What about the people who have lived here for generations, now forced to change their way of life? The government not allowing them the same privileges as the tigers, dictating where they can move, eat and sleep. Dictating the changes needed to be made to the life their families have been living for centuries. Suddenly being pushed to chose between abandoning their home in hopes for a brighter future, or staying, like very few have, trying to protect their traditions. Trying to conserve them, like the government has with the tiger.

But has it really? Has the government really conserved  the tiger and its habitat, when a quarter of the land promised to him has been taken away? Used to build a giant dam, a way to gain money, hidden inside the generous offer to protect the tiger. Hidden, just like the stories of the people who were there before it and are now struggling to survive.

So, who should we choose to conserve? The people? The tiger? Are we actually conserving anything at all?