Based on case studies on nine leasehold forestry groups in two locations in Gorkha and Tanahun districts of Western Nepal, the paper argues that LHF is an initiative with good philosophy but that implementation does not necessarily conform to the intention. While the endeavor is seen to have been instrumental in contributing towards environmental recuperation and uplifting of rural income, it is often accompanied by clear degree of unintended consequences. The problems may be seen in terms of sub-optimality in environmental recuperation, in potential unsustainability and in social inequity. It is speculated that, as the situation stands today, unintended negative outcome might overweigh the positive one. The reasons for the anomalous outcomes are attributed both to field level intervention and the policy, which tend not to fully understand the dynamic as well as contestable nature of human-resource interaction. Suggestions are made in favour of an 'infusion' of Community forestry and the Leasehold forestry in a broader framework of poverty alleviation initiative. This would involve intervention as a facilitative process through which people with indigenous use rights are sensitized and brought forward who put 'their heads together' in sorting out how they intend to deal with the twin resource conservation as well as poverty alleviation issues.
