Captive breeding is necessary but not sufficient for the recovery of critically endangered species. Discuss with reference to the Great Indian Bustard.
New · District CollectorCan you hold the district for 72 hours?Floods, a heatwave, an outbreak, a grievance queue. Take the decisions, see the consequences.Play →The Great Indian Bustard (GIB) is a Schedule-I species under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 [1]. It has vanished from about 90% of its former range and survives mainly in Rajasthan and Gujarat [3]. Captive breeding under Project GIB has bought it time. Recovery, however, depends on making the wild safe for the birds that are released.
Why captive breeding is necessary
- Insurance population: WII and the state forest departments run breeding centres at Sam and Ramdevra (Jaisalmer). They aim to build a captive stock for release into the wild [1].
- Rapid scale-up: the captive stock has reached about 94 birds, and artificial insemination has produced most of the new chicks [2].
- Egg rescue: eggs collected from the wild are safe from predators and trampling. The Supreme Court endorsed moving eggs to breeding centres [3].
Why it is not sufficient
- Release into the same threat: WII called power-line collision the species' "biggest threat". All six GIB deaths recorded in Thar during 2017–20 were on high-tension lines [3].
- Biology: the Ministry of Power admitted the bird lacks frontal vision and is too heavy to swerve away from wires [3]. A captive-bred bird is just as exposed as a wild one.
- Contested mitigation: in 2024 the Court diluted its blanket undergrounding order to protect India's renewable-energy commitments. It still called GIB preservation "non-negotiable" [4]. The threat is therefore being managed, not removed.
- Habitat loss: breeding numbers mean little if grasslands keep shrinking. Releases need protected, grazing-managed breeding grounds [3].
What must accompany it
- Undergrounding lines or fitting bird diverters in priority habitat before birds are released there [3].
- Predator-proof fenced enclosures and controlled grazing at breeding sites [3].
- Funding: CAMPA funds [3] and the Species Recovery Programme under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme–Development of Wildlife Habitats [1].
- Expert-committee siting of energy projects that weighs conservation alongside clean-energy goals [4].
- Post-release tracking so success is measured by survival in the wild, not by the number of chicks hatched.
Captive breeding adds birds; only a safe habitat keeps them alive. Combining breeding with safe power lines and protected grasslands would turn Project GIB from a holding operation into real recovery. This fulfils the State's duty under Article 48A and the citizen's duty under Article 51A(g), and advances SDG 15 (Life on Land).
Sources
- 1PIB — Conservation Plan for Great Indian Bustards (MoEFCC)Schedule-I status; breeding at Sam with WII and state forest departments; aim of release and in-situ conservation; Species Recovery Programme under CSS-DWH
- 2PIB — Project GIB Adds Three Chicks, Taking Captive Stock to 94 Birdscaptive stock of about 94; chicks produced mainly through artificial insemination
- 3Supreme Court of India — M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India, Order dated 19 April 2021 (W.P.(C) 838/2019)90% habitat loss; WII finding that power lines are the biggest threat; six GIB deaths on high-tension lines in 2017–20; lack of frontal vision; egg transfer to breeding centres; predator-proof fencing; undergrounding and diverters; CAMPA funds
- 4Supreme Court of India — M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India, Judgment dated 21 March 2024blanket undergrounding order modified; GIB preservation "non-negotiable"; expert committee to balance conservation and renewable energy