Species reintroduction programmes such as Project Cheetah and the tiger reintroduction in Buxa signal a shift towards interventionist conservation in India. Critically examine their ecological and ethical merits.

Reintroduction means returning a species to a range it once occupied. It marks a shift from passive, protected-area "fortress" conservation to hands-on restoration. Two programmes lead this shift: Project Cheetah at Kuno, launched in 2022 [4], and the phased tiger release at Buxa Tiger Reserve, West Bengal, which began in October 2026 [3]. Their merits are real, but they hold only if certain conditions are met.

Ecological merits

• Restores apex predators: the cheetah was declared extinct in India in 1952 and now returns to its historic range [4].
• Bridges isolation: more than three-fourths of India's tigers live inside protected areas [2]. Farmland between reserves blocks natural dispersal, so Buxa could not be recolonised without help.
• Proven template: NTCA has already rewilded Sariska and Panna through reintroduction [6].

Ecological limitations

• High early mortality: deaths at Kuno drew scrutiny. NTCA itself notes that early African reintroductions saw over 50% mortality [5].
• Habitat before animal: at Satkosia (Odisha), villagers opposed the move and an introduced tiger died [7]. The reserve still has very few tigers [2].
• Genetic bottleneck: a small number of founder animals risks inbreeding unless source populations are diverse.

Ethical merits

• Undoing human-caused loss: this fits Article 51A(g), the citizen's duty to protect wildlife, and is a form of intergenerational justice.
• Global stewardship: India holds about 70% of the world's wild tigers (3,682 in 2022) [1], so its methods set norms for other range countries.

Ethical concerns

• Costs fall locally: tigers killed 22 people in Maharashtra between January and June 2024 alone [8]. Forest-edge poor households bear the costs of national success.
• Displacement: preparing Kuno involved relocating 24 villages [4]. This raises questions about consent under the Forest Rights Act and about the fortress-conservation model.
• Animal welfare: capture, sedation, long transport and confinement cause stress to individual animals for the sake of the species.

Reintroduction is therefore a tool that complements habitat protection; it cannot replace it. The way forward:

• release animals in phases, following protocol;
• secure prey and corridors first;
• set up compensation and rapid-response teams before any release;
• have monitoring data reviewed independently by bodies such as WII.

The test of success is a self-sustaining population that no longer needs management. That would show hands-on conservation serving Article 48A and SDG 15.