The grass cutting programme (GCP) of Royal Chitwan National Park (RCNP) has been very successful in gaining local people's acceptance of RCNP. The GCP is recognized internationally as a model for park-people conflict resolution, but has seemingly become a spent force. The aim of the present study was to assess the extent to which the GCP is a form of ‘community-based conservation’ on the one hand, or ‘nature-based development’ on the other. During the ten days of open access in 1999, almost 50 000 tonnes of biomass were removed from the Park; the total gross economic value of the GCP in 1999 was more than US$ 1 million. Illegal fuelwood was the single most important product extracted from RCNP and accounted for half of the total quantity and economic value of all resources collected. It is argued that the GCP does not, in its present form, comply with the concept of community-based conservation, but is rather an example of nature-based development, where important natural core areas are exploited in the name of development. This study suggests a two-fold approach to reappraise the importance of the GCP in solving park-people conflicts without ignoring nature conservation. Firstly, access should be provided in different areas at different times instead of opening the whole Park at the same time. Secondly, since for the last 10–15 years buffer-zone community forestry has not been able to substitute fuelwood from RCNP, other ways to address local people's energy demand should be considered. It is argued that park-people conflicts in RCNP have not been solved, but only postponed, especially by compromising forest conservation and the possibility of the GCP to supply villagers with essential products in the future.