Examine the challenges in reintroducing captive-bred wildlife into natural habitats. Illustrate with the Great Indian Bustard rewilding initiative.

Q. Examine the challenges in reintroducing captive-bred wildlife into natural habitats. Illustrate with the Great Indian Bustard rewilding initiative. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

Reintroduction — releasing captive-bred animals into the wild — is the hardest stage of ex-situ conservation, since a bird bred in an incubator must survive a habitat that once drove its species to the brink. India's Great Indian Bustard (GIB) programme, which in July 2026 placed three captive-bred chicks in a purpose-built rewilding tunnel at Ramdevra, Jaisalmer, illustrates both the promise and the pitfalls [1].

Behavioural and genetic deficits - Captive-reared young lack parental training in foraging, predator avoidance and dispersal, and risk imprinting on humans. Hence GIB chicks spend about four months in the tunnel under CCTV watch, fed without direct human contact, before release into Desert National Park [1]. - A narrow founder base invites inbreeding depression; the captive stock stood at 94 birds in June 2026, sustained through natural mating and artificial insemination [2].

Persistence of the original threats - Reintroduction fails where the cause of decline is unaddressed. Power-line collisions remain the GIB's chief killer; in M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India, the Supreme Court balanced renewable-energy expansion against undergrounding, relying on bird diverters and priority-area regulation [3]. - Grassland degradation in the Thar continues — Rajasthan's wild population fell from over 1,000 to roughly 125 by 2013 [4].

Institutional, financial and ethical challenges - Recovery spans decades, demanding assured funding: the integrated 'Habitat Improvement and Conservation Breeding of GIB' project carries a ₹33.85 crore outlay [5], with the tunnel alone costing ₹9.25 crore [1]. - It requires seamless MoEFCC–WII–Rajasthan Forest Department coordination [2], and raises the ethical caution that ex-situ success must not substitute for in-situ habitat protection [4].

Reintroduction therefore succeeds only when biology, habitat and governance align. A staged soft-release backed by post-release telemetry, community-led sewan grassland restoration, and strict power-line mitigation can convert the GIB from a rescue story into a self-sustaining wild population — advancing SDG 15 on life on land.

(~320 words)

Sources: 1. The Hindu, "In a first, three chicks of the endangered Great Indian Bustard have been moved into a custom-built rewilding tunnel" (27 July 2026) — rewilding tunnel at Ramdevra, four-month CCTV-monitored no-contact rearing, ₹9.25 crore cost, release into Desert National Park 2. PIB, "Project Great Indian Bustard Captive Breeding Programme enters 4th year with Two New Chicks" — captive stock figures, artificial insemination, MoEFCC–WII–Rajasthan Forest Department partnership 3. Supreme Court of India, M.K. Ranjitsinh & Ors. v. Union of India (2024; modified 19 December 2025) — power-line mortality, bird diverters and priority-area framework 4. Rajasthan Forest Department, "Project Great Indian Bustard" — population decline to about 125 by 2013, in-situ habitat and grassland measures 5. National CAMPA, "Habitat Improvement and Conservation Breeding of the Great Indian Bustard — an integrated approach" — ₹33.85 crore five-year outlay