The great bustard is not extinct: conserving a bird of open country

The great bustard (Otis tarda) is a living bird of open landscapes across parts of Europe and Asia. Its size and dependence on broad, unobstructed ground make it vulnerable to changes that can seem modest on a map: a more intensively farmed field, a new road, overhead wires or repeated disturbance near a nest. The Russian source title describes the bird as disappearing, but the species is not extinct. Its regional populations differ sharply in size and trend.

BirdLife International uplisted the species from Vulnerable to Endangered in the 2023 Red List update because of threats across Eurasia. The Convention on Migratory Species reports that European great bustards number in the tens of thousands, while Asian populations are far smaller. Its 2024 action plan for Asia gives approximate estimates of 500 to 1,000 western Asian great bustards and 1,300 to 2,200 eastern great bustards. These are regional estimates, not a single simultaneous global census, and their dates and methods should stay attached when cited.

A bird built for open ground

Great bustards use steppe, grassland and agricultural landscapes where visibility is high and nesting takes place on the ground. Females incubate eggs in shallow ground nests, so the timing and management of field work can affect breeding success. Males gather at display areas where they show their white plumage and inflated neck feathers. This mating system concentrates conspicuous activity in places that can be sensitive to disturbance.

The bird’s relationship with farmland is not simple. Some cultivated fields provide food or open feeding habitat, while intensive operations can destroy nests, reduce cover or make the landscape less suitable. A field’s value depends on crop, season, management and surrounding habitat. Conservation therefore cannot be reduced to “farmland is bad” or “open ground is enough.”

Population estimates reveal a regional divide

CMS’s Middle-European population page gives a European estimate of 42,113 to 51,815 birds and notes rapid declines across much of Central and Eastern Europe. The 2024 Asian action plan describes much smaller populations across the Asian range and identifies differences between the western and eastern forms. These figures come from separate management assessments. They describe broad regions rather than the number of birds in one protected reserve.

That difference matters for conservation. A large Iberian population can make the species look secure in a global total even while small populations elsewhere disappear. Conversely, a decline in one regional estimate should not be described as the disappearance of the entire species. Monitoring needs to report locality, survey year, method and the age or breeding class counted.

Wires and changing agriculture

Power lines can kill bustards through collision, particularly where wires cross regular flight paths or open habitat. Agricultural change creates a different set of pressures: machinery can disturb or destroy ground nests, changes in crop and vegetation structure can alter feeding conditions, and roads or development can divide open areas. These pressures vary among regions and seasons, so mitigation must be based on local monitoring.

Conservation agreements in Europe call for coordinated action among governments, habitat restoration and landscape planning. Measures can include marking or burying dangerous wires, keeping large open areas connected, timing farm operations around nesting and maintaining low-intensity grassland or fallow patches. None is a stand-alone cure. A line marked for birds does not help if the surrounding feeding and breeding grounds are converted.

The great bustard’s problem has a useful parallel with the Florida panther: a species can benefit from a targeted intervention and still remain exposed to the landscape around it. The details differ, but both examples show why connectivity and infrastructure need to be treated as part of wildlife management.

Why conservation depends on cooperation

Great bustards may cross national borders during seasonal movement. Protecting one nesting site cannot secure a bird that uses a wider range, and inconsistent land management can create gaps between protected areas. The CMS framework brings governments and experts together to coordinate surveys, habitat actions and mitigation across the species’ range.

Reintroductions and reinforcement can help some populations, but releasing birds into unsuitable habitat would only move the risk. CMS guidance emphasizes preparation, monitoring and assessment before and after release. Where a population remains, preventing further loss and maintaining the habitat mosaic may be more effective than trying to rebuild it later.

A steppe bird, not a vanished species

The great bustard’s story is not a simple extinction narrative. It is a patchwork of persistent populations, local declines and conservation programmes. The species can survive in working landscapes, but only when land use leaves enough room for its seasonal needs and avoids turning every open space into a hazard.

To judge progress, conservationists need repeated regional surveys rather than a single dramatic number. Stable breeding areas, successful nesting and movement between habitat patches provide stronger evidence of recovery than a headline that calls the bird “saved” or “lost.” The great bustard remains present; the question is whether people can keep the landscapes that make that presence viable.