Except Madhya Pradesh, all the tiger-range states have signed a tripartite agreement with the Centre and sanctuaries on big cat conservation which makes them eligible for funds.
West Bengal, which initially had expressed reservation in signing the agreement that makes the tiger reserve directors accountable for the predator's mortality, too recently signed the pact, an official said.
However, Madhya Pradesh's reluctance to sign the agreement has drawn flak from the environmentalists, who fear that in the absence of Central-sponsored funds, the state might lose its tag of "tiger state", having as many as six major sanctuaries.
"All the states have already signed it and this is the way forward to revive the dwindling tiger population. A large sum of money is being put into tiger conservation efforts and states must be made accountable for fund spending," wildlife expert Belinda Wright of Wildlife Protection Society of India (WPSI) said.
She asserted that since it is the tax payers money, all the states and the Centre need to have a unified stand and agreement to protect the endangered tigers. "We hope Madhya Pradesh would soon sign the pact," she added.
Tiger expert Ashok Kumar from Wildlife Trust of India (WTI) expressed similar views. "Unless it (MP) signs the tripartite agreement, it will not get fund for management of reserves, thus putting the striped cats at risk. The pact aims to ensure accountability in the state's tiger conservation efforts."
The Madhya Pradesh government has sought about Rs3,200 crore for relocation of 117 villages situated inside the six reserves -- Panna, Satpura, Kanha, Pench and Bandhavgarh.
However, state additional chief secretary (Forest) Prashant Mehta termed the pact as "unconstitutional" and said under the existing bilateral pact, the state chief wildlife
warden was already responsible for tiger management.
"Nevertheless, we are open to the talks. We have suggested a bilateral pact between Centre and the state and Chief Wildlife Warden can sign an individual agreement with
the director of reserves on tiger conservation," Mehta added.
On being asked if absence of pact would hamper fund flow and hence tiger conservation, he retorted "had the Centre been concerned about the safety of wild cats, it would not
have tried to impose the pact on the states."
Seventeen states in the country have tiger population.
