Bird islands

1. At a Glance

• "Bird islands" is the title of The Hindu's editorial of 6 October 2026 (p. 8, International edition). It is about Great Indian Bustard (GIB) conservation. Its argument is that India's conservation efforts must go beyond symbolism [1].
• The GIB is a heavy grassland bird found mainly in Rajasthan (with Gujarat). Its wild population is about 120, and it has been close to extinction for nearly 50 years [1].
• The case shows two goals pulling against each other: biodiversity protection and renewable-energy expansion, especially solar and wind power lines in the Thar. It also shows how far the courts have gone in environmental governance [1][2][4].
• Useful for UPSC across GS-III (Environment, Infrastructure/Energy) and GS-II (Judiciary), and for Prelims species and protected-area questions.

2. Why in the News

• Early October 2026: two male GIBs were released into the wild at Desert National Park (DNP), Jaisalmer. The Union and Rajasthan Environment Ministers attended [1].
• The conservation programme now holds 97 birds, with 9 more awaiting release [1].
• 57 of the birds are captive-bred. They produced 29 chicks this year and 24 last year [1].
• 19 December 2025: the Supreme Court approved an expert committee's recommendations and redrew the priority conservation areas in Rajasthan and Gujarat [2][3].

3. Background & Evolution

• National bird debate: ornithologist Salim Ali wanted the GIB as India's national bird so that protection would follow. The Indian Board for Wildlife chose the peacock instead [1].
• Population decline [1]:
• ~1,260 in 1969
• ~600 by 2000
• 140–175 in Rajasthan by the 2010s

• ~120 in 2026

• Causes of decline [1]:

• Hunting, including by royals, reportedly continued until the late 1970s.
• Irrigation in Rajasthan turned grasslands, once dismissed as "wastelands", into irrigated fields with heavy pesticide use.
• Roads made the bird more exposed.

• High-tension power lines are the most recent threat.

• 2019: a GIB breeding centre was set up to collect and protect eggs taken from the wild [6].

• 19 April 2021: in M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India, the Supreme Court ordered overhead power lines in GIB habitat (about 99,000 sq km) to be put underground within one year [2][4].

• The Hindu describes the order as applying to low-voltage lines in priority habitats [1].

• After the 2021 order: renewable-energy companies argued that undergrounding hurt the economics of solar power. The Court then modified the order so that it covered only a subset of power lines [1][7].

• 19 December 2025: the Supreme Court approved the expert committee's recommendations and finalised the revised priority areas (details in Section 6) [2][3].

4. Core Static Facts

5. Multi-Dimensional Analysis

Environmental

• The GIB is a flagship species for grasslands, which were historically treated as "wastelands" and converted to farmland [1].
• Its habitat is now split into pockets, likely the "islands" in the editorial's title. The surviving birds are limited to protected areas such as DNP [1][2].
• An estimated 18 power-line deaths a year is a heavy loss for a population of about 120 [5].

Economic / Energy

• Rajasthan and Gujarat are central to India's solar and wind expansion. Undergrounding transmission lines raises costs, which is why renewable-energy companies objected [1][7].
• The December 2025 order tries to balance both sides: it concentrates evacuation into a single corridor up to 5 km wide south of DNP instead of stopping renewable development [2].
• Researchers are also testing ways to reduce harm from wind turbines, such as painting a turbine blade black [8].

Legal / Constitutional

• The Supreme Court has acted as a continuing supervisor of this issue: it issued the 2021 undergrounding order, later modified it, and appointed an expert committee whose recommendations it approved in 2025 [2][4].
• In December 2025 the bench (Justices P.S. Narasimha and A.S. Chandurkar) called GIB protection "non-negotiable" [2].
• The M.K. Ranjitsinh litigation is widely discussed as a contest between climate rights and the bustard's protection [7].

Scientific / Technological

• Conservation breeding has worked so far: 57 captive-bred birds produced 29 chicks this year [1].
• Conservation scientists also collect eggs from the wild for the breeding centre [6].
• Other mitigation tools include undergrounding lines and bird diverters, and modifying turbines [2][8].

Ethical / Governance

• The editorial's main point is that release ceremonies "with considerable bureaucratic pomp" do not replace habitat protection [1].
• The case raises questions of intergenerational equity: weighing a species' survival against the climate benefits of clean energy [7].

Historical

• Choosing the peacock as national bird over the GIB was an early missed chance for protection [1].
• Hunting by royals continued until the late 1970s [1].

6. Recent Developments (last 12–18 months)

• 19 December 2025: the Supreme Court approved expert committee recommendations for GIB protection in Rajasthan and Gujarat [2][3]. The order:
• fixed priority areas at 14,013 sq km (Rajasthan) and 740 sq km (Gujarat);
• ordered 80 km of 33 kV lines to be put underground immediately;
• set up a single power corridor, up to 5 km wide, south of DNP;

• banned new wind turbines and solar parks above 2 MW inside these areas.

• Breeding seasons 2025 and 2026: captive-bred birds produced 24 chicks (2025) and 29 chicks (2026) [1].

• Early October 2026: two male GIBs were released at DNP in Jaisalmer; 9 more are awaiting release [1].

7. Prelims Hooks

• The GIB's core habitat is Desert National Park, Jaisalmer (Rajasthan) [1].
• Salim Ali proposed the GIB as national bird; the Indian Board for Wildlife chose the peacock [1].
• GIB population: about 1,260 in 1969 compared with about 120 today [1].
• The GIB breeding centre was set up in 2019 [6].
• The 2021 undergrounding order came in M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India [4][7].
• The April 2021 order covered about 99,000 sq km of GIB habitat [2].
• Revised priority area in Rajasthan: 14,013 sq km; Gujarat: 740 sq km (December 2025) [2].
• 80 km of 33 kV lines were ordered underground immediately [2].
• The dedicated power corridor is up to 5 km wide, south of DNP [2].
• Within priority areas, solar parks are allowed only up to 2 MW [2].
• According to WII, about 18 GIBs a year die from power-line collisions [5].
• Biological reason for collisions: the bird lacks frontal vision and is heavy [5].
• December 2025 bench: Justices P.S. Narasimha and A.S. Chandurkar [2].

8. Why Releasing Birds Does Not Stop the Deaths

• The birds are released into the same place that is killing them
• WII estimates about 18 GIBs die every year by hitting power lines [5].
• The best breeding year so far produced 29 chicks, all in captivity [1].

• So power lines can take back most of what one good breeding year adds. A released bird faces the same wires as a wild one.

• The wires will stay up for some time yet

• The December 2025 order says undergrounding and rerouting must start at once, but gives two years to finish [2].

• Until that work is done, every release goes into a landscape that still has the main threat in it.

• This is what the editorial means by "symbolism"

• A release ceremony gives a number that is easy to report: two birds released, nine more waiting [1].
• The number that decides whether the species survives is a different one: how many birds die each year in the wild. That number is not counted at the ceremony.
• In a mains answer, put it simply: captive breeding adds birds, and only habitat safety keeps them alive.

9. Five Years of Orders, Very Little Proof of Compliance

• The same order has been given again and again
• December 2020: the National Green Tribunal (NGT) ordered power lines in GIB habitat for new renewable projects to go underground. It asked states to put bird diverters on existing lines, preferably within four months [9].
• April 2021: the Supreme Court gave a one-year deadline for undergrounding [4].
• April 2022: the Court had to ask its own three-member committee to report within three weeks on what had actually been done [10].

• When a court keeps asking for status reports, the deadlines are not being met.

• No one publishes a simple progress count

• The public record has no clear figure for kilometres of line put underground or diverters fitted after 2021. Even the 2022 update request contains none [10].

• Without that number, nobody can check whether a deadline was met. So nobody can be held responsible for missing it.

• Even the main safety device is disputed

• A bird diverter is a bright plastic disc hung on a wire so that a flying bird sees the wire in time [9].
• Scientists disagree on how well diverters work for the GIB [9]. This matters because the bird lacks frontal vision (it cannot see well straight ahead) [5].

• If diverters do not work for this bird, then lines that are "fitted with diverters" may still be killing it.

• Different counts make the decline hard to track

• One conservationist said fewer than 100 GIBs were left in the wild by 2022 [10]. The editorial says about 120 in 2026 [1].
• Counts made by different people with different methods cannot be compared directly. A clear, regular official census is itself part of the missing evidence.

10. The Best Argument for Solar Power, and Where It Falls Short

• The strongest case on the solar side (as the Supreme Court accepted it in March 2024)
• Burying lines over about 99,000 sq km was found to be technically hard. Faults are difficult to find in underground cables, and shifting desert sand can cover the markers that show where cables run [11].
• It also costs more, wastes more power in transmission and needs more land [11].
• India has climate commitments that need large solar and wind growth [11].

• The Court read a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change into Article 14 (equality) and Article 21 (right to life) [11]. So clean energy also has a constitutional claim.

• What is right about this argument

• The 2021 order did cover a very large area. Burying every line across 99,000 sq km was never going to be practical [11].

• The Court rightly said this is "not a binary choice", meaning not a simple either/or between the bird and clean energy [11].

• Where it falls short

• The Court did not test the government's claims. It accepted that underground cables cannot work in the desert without asking for independent technical evidence [7].
• One rule was applied to two very different zones. The birds actually live in a core zone of about 13,663 sq km. The wider "potential" area is about 80,000 sq km, where they are rarely found. The critic argues it was a mistake to relax protection in both for the same reasons [7].
• The burden of proof was set too low. When fewer than 250 mature birds are left, the evidence needed to remove their main legal protection should be very strong [7].

• One green goal was used against another. Calling it "climate versus bustard" can end up sacrificing a dying species "in the name of saving the planet" [7].

• Where things now stand

• The December 2025 order largely follows the critic's suggested middle path: strict rules inside a small core area (14,013 sq km in Rajasthan), and power routed through one corridor outside it [2].
• So the debate has moved on. It is no longer about whether the rules are right. It is about whether anyone will enforce them on the ground.

11. Who Should Do What Next

• The court-appointed committee should publish a yearly progress count
• The committee includes members from MNRE (Ministry of New and Renewable Energy) and WII (Wildlife Institute of India) [10].
• Each year it should publish three numbers: kilometres put underground, diverters fitted, and GIB deaths found under lines.

• Deadlines have been missed since 2020 [9][4]. A public count is the cheapest way to make missing them visible.

• MNRE and power companies should treat undergrounding as a normal project cost

• Experts have said underground lines cost more, but the government should include that cost when it plans projects in GIB areas [9].

• If the cost is known at the bidding stage, companies price it in. They do not need to fight it in court years later.

• WII should test diverters and turbine changes on this species

• Scientists disagree on whether diverters work for the GIB [9]. Field trials should measure deaths on lines with diverters and on lines without them.

• The same applies to painting one turbine blade black [8]. A tool should become a rule only after it is shown to work for this bird.

• The Rajasthan Forest Department should release birds only where lines are already safe

• The priority areas already ban new wind turbines and solar parks above 2 MW [2].

• Releases should go first to the parts of these areas where undergrounding is finished. Otherwise the money spent on captive breeding is lost.

• Parliament should pass a climate law that sets the rules for such trade-offs

• India has no umbrella climate law (one main law covering climate change). The Philippines, Finland and South Korea do [11].
• Without such a law, the Supreme Court has to weigh climate against biodiversity case by case. With a law, Parliament would set the rules for siting projects, and courts would only check that they are followed.

12. Anchors for Answers

• Data: About 18 GIBs die a year from power-line collisions (WII estimate), against a wild population of about 120 [5][1]
• Data: The core zone where GIBs actually live is about 13,663 sq km; the wider "potential" habitat is about 80,000 sq km [7]
• Report/Committee: Supreme Court's three-member expert committee (Rahul Rawat, MNRE; Sutirtha Dutta, WII; Devesh Gadhavi, Corbett Foundation); its recommendations were approved on 19 December 2025 [10][2]
• Law/Case: M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India: 19 April 2021 undergrounding order [4]; 21 March 2024 judgment recognising a right against the adverse effects of climate change under Articles 14 and 21 [11]
• Law/Case: NGT order of December 2020 on underground lines and bird diverters in GIB habitat [9]
• Comparison: The Philippines, Finland and South Korea have umbrella climate laws; India does not, so its courts decide climate-versus-biodiversity trade-offs case by case [11]
• Scheme: Green Energy Corridor: its route was redrawn into a single corridor up to 5 km wide south of Desert National Park [2]

13. Mains Relevance

• GS-III: conservation, environmental pollution and degradation, environmental impact assessment; infrastructure (energy).
• GS-II: separation of powers and judicial activism; government policies and interventions.
• GS-IV (case study): balancing competing public goods (biodiversity and climate mitigation).
• Possible question stems: 1. The Great Indian Bustard case exemplifies the conflict between climate action and biodiversity conservation. Critically examine how the Supreme Court has sought to balance the two. 2. Captive breeding is necessary but not sufficient for the recovery of critically endangered species. Discuss with reference to the Great Indian Bustard. 3. Grasslands in India have long been treated as 'wastelands'. Analyse the ecological consequences of this framing and suggest policy correctives.

14. Related Topics to Study Next

• Lesser Florican and Bengal Florican: other Indian bustards that face similar grassland loss.
• Desert National Park and the Thar ecosystem: the protected area at the centre of this case.
• Green Energy Corridor: the transmission network whose route the December 2025 order redrew [2].
• Wildlife Institute of India (WII): the scientific body behind the collision estimates and the breeding work [5].
• Convention on Migratory Species (CMS): India hosted COP13, where GIB listing was proposed.
• Project Cheetah: another flagship reintroduction effort in grassland and savanna habitat.
• Right against the adverse effects of climate change: jurisprudence linked to the Ranjitsinh case [7].

15. NCERT Concepts to Revise

• Great Indian Bustard (Geography): The species at the heart of the note: its habitat, threats and the Supreme Court orders protecting it.
• Green Energy Corridor (Geography): Transmission network whose route the December 2025 order redrew to keep power lines away from bustard habitat.
• Judicial activism (Polity): The Supreme Court's continuing directions, from the 2021 undergrounding order to the 2025 priority areas, show courts steering environmental policy.
• Biodiversity conservation (Geography): Captive breeding, protected habitat and release programmes are the conservation tools the editorial says must go beyond symbolism.
• Climate change mitigation (Geography): Renewable-energy expansion is a climate goal that clashes with bustard protection, which is the central tension of the case.
• National park (Geography): Desert National Park, Jaisalmer, is the bustard's core habitat and release site; revise how national parks are protected.

16. Common Errors / Trap Areas

• Scope of the 2021 order: sources describe it differently. One says "all overhead lines in about 99,000 sq km" [2]; another says "low-voltage lines in priority habitats" [1]. It was later narrowed to a subset of lines [1]. Do not treat the 2021 order as final.
• Priority area figures: the December 2025 numbers (14,013 / 740 sq km) are the revised figures. Do not confuse them with the 99,000 sq km of 2021 [2].
• Three different numbers: the wild population (about 120), the programme stock (97), and the captive-bred birds (57) are separate figures [1].
• The national bird decision was made by the Indian Board for Wildlife, not Parliament [1].
• Facts not checked in this note's sources: the GIB's IUCN status (commonly given as Critically Endangered), its Schedule under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, and its CMS Appendix listing. The searches did not cover these, so verify them on iucnredlist.org or moef.gov.in before using them.