An Ecological Restoration Plan for Maungatautari

Transcription

1 Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust 64 Alpha Street, P.O. Box 476, Cambridge, New Zealand Ph: Fax: [email protected] Website: An Ecological Restoration Plan for Maungatautari Working Document Our Vision To remove forever, introduced mammalian pests and predators from Maungatautari, and restore to the forest a healthy diversity of indigenous plants and animals not seen in our lifetime. Working Document last revision September 2004 i

2 Compiled by Joanna C. McQueen Centre for Biodiversity and Ecology Research Department of Biological Sciences The University of Waikato Private Bag 3105 Hamilton CBER Contract Report No. 34 Contributing authors: Chris Smuts-Kennedy 1, Kevin Collier 2, Bruce D. Clarkson 3, Bruce Burns 4, and Roger MacGibbon 5 Prepared for Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust March Ecological advisor to Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust, PO Box 476, Cambridge 2. Freshwater Ecologist, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, PO Box 11115, Hamilton 3. Associate Professor, Centre for Biodiversity and Ecology Research, Department of Biological Sciences, The University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton 4. Scientist, Maanaki Whenua Landcare Research, Private Bag 3127, Hamilton 5. Restoration Ecologist, Natural Logic Ltd, Taupo Reviewed by Matt Maitland, Rotoiti Nature Recovery Project, Department of Conservation. Working Document last revision September 2004 ii

3 Table of Contents Page Use of this plan iv Consultants Brief vi Recommendations vii Summary viii Acknowledgements xi Part 1: Background Information 2 Part 2: Restoration 38 Part 3: Monitoring and Risk Analysis 78 Working Document last revision September 2004 iii

4 Use of this plan This restoration plan is a working document and will need to be adjusted as the project evolves and more information is gained. The use of this plan should recognise its role as a guide to the restoration. In many instances, this plan is the starting point for debates which need to be conducted between scientists, and often the community as well, on how to proceed. This plan has been separated into three parts for ease of use. Part 1 contains the background information for the project and the context in which the project is being undertaken. Part 2 contains the information needed for restoration, including what species to introduce and the timing of introductions. Part 3 contains information on monitoring and a risk assessment for the project. For ease of use, each of these parts has been designed as a stand alone document which can be bound individually or combined to make a total volume. Appendixes are placed at the end of each part to allow binding as a complete document, however the numbering allows binding as a whole. After each main heading, a summary of that section is given in a box. Where a section raises questions that need to be debated or researched, questions are given in a box at the end of the section. Working Document last revision September 2004 iv

5 How the restoration plan fits into the Maungatautari project Restore the diversity, vitality and resilience of the ecosystems of Maungatautari Educational/recreational plan Management Plan Restoration Plan Restore the forest Restore the wildlife Restore waterways Forest ecosystem is self sustainable Connections to landscape Complete fence Appoint project manager for pest control Pre-operation monitoring on mountain Appoint person to manage wildlife Workplans for each species Secure funding and approval for translocations Plant riparian zones Monitor water quality Appoint monitoring coordinator Monitor forest condition and wildlife Locals plant riparian zones and corridors on surrounding land Operation plans for pest control developed Carry out pest control Make wildlife introductions Prove pest-free status Working Document last revision September 2004 Monitor introductions v

6 Consultants Brief A restoration plan for Maungatautari is necessary to detail the timing and co-ordination of implementation of restoration goals and to ensure finances and resources are available when required. The vision for Maungatautari also needs to be incorporated into such a plan. To restore Maungatautari to a largely indigenous, diverse, fully functional, (near) self-sustaining forest, permanently free of mammalian pests and to strengthen the mauri of the forest and protect the mana of the maunga. The restoration plan needs to comprise the following processes: 1. Integrate ideas from experts and groups interested in the restoration process, including iwi. 2. Establish restoration goals 3. Establish measurable success criteria 4. Risk analysis including factors that may limit restoration 5. Steps to ameliorate factors that may limit restoration 6. Management strategies for restoration including: a. Type of eradications/reintroductions b. Timing of eradications/reintroductions c. Monitoring of eradications/reintroductions and checking against success criteria 7. Develop a realistic timeline for restoration goals 8. Develop work plans that can be followed by restoration managers 9. Identify the resource requirements for restoration* 10. Identify the costs of restoration* *these points have not been covered in the plan due to the dynamic and ever changing nature of the restoration process. They are also separate issues to ecological restoration and should be covered elsewhere. Working Document last revision September 2004 vi

7 Recommendations 1. That MEIT carries out best practice monitoring methods for mammalian pests, whilst acknowledging the shortcomings of these methods, so that the pest-free status of Maungatautari can be shown. 2. That MEIT encourages and/or assists in research into low density pest monitoring to provide a permanent solution to pest detection over large areas with minimum cost and labour. 3. That MEIT establishes permanent monitoring programmes so that changes in biodiversity and ecosystem functioning can be measured both pre and post fence construction and pest elimination. 4. That MEIT carries out extensive surveys of plants and animals on the mountain, especially with the goal to determine whether any remnant populations of species proposed for re-introduction still exist and whether introductions of other native species will impact these populations. 5. That MEIT establishes restoration goals for the two enclosures. For example, are they to be a part of the larger goal of returning the mountain to its original condition, or are they a safe haven for endangered species that would not necessarily have lived on the mountain in the past? 6. That MEIT does not work in isolation but establishes links with other similar restoration projects (such as Karori Sanctuary) to increase the body of knowledge on this type of restoration work and prevent mistakes from being repeated. 7. That MEIT follows the species introductions outlined in this restoration plan and/or makes introduction decisions based on sound scientific knowledge and consultation with the appropriate experts to ensure success is not compromised by wrong choices. 8. That MEIT records all activities that have been carried out on the mountain so that successes and failures can be analysed in the correct context. 9. That MEIT employs a mountain caretaker who is based on the mountain and who is intimately involved in the day to day running of the restoration (such as bird feeding/monitoring etc.). 10. That MEIT shortly begins the process of making workplans (following the DOC standard operating procedure for translocations) for each planned species introduction and begins dialogue with the appropriate recovery groups to ensure access to the appropriate species. 11. That MEIT encourages research into the ecological impacts of wasps and any other exotic invertebrates on the mountain. 12. That MEIT encourages research into species and communities about which little is known of their biology and structure. 13. That MEIT keeps a database of biota known to exist on the mountain which is available to all. Working Document last revision September 2004 vii

8 14. That MEIT encourages activities (such as planting) that provide connections from the mountain to the surrounding landscape. 15. That MEIT constructs a comprehensive risk management strategy for the project, including both risks to both the ecological and management sides of the project. Summary The aim of this restoration is to reactivate the major successional processes likely to have operated in pre-human times (before the arrival of mammalian pests), so that Maungatautari reaches his own ecological balance. Some species introductions may fail and others may exceed our expectations, but, so long as best practice techniques were used in the translocation, the restoration can be deemed a success. MEIT can give the mountain the appropriate ingredients to restore itself, but cannot control the dynamic balance that results. This is a trial on a grand scale as we do not know what will happen once mammals are removed from a place which they have long inhabited. We do not know how ecosystem balance will be found with the removal of these pests, but a reduced animal fauna to replace them with. We do not know how important extinct species such as the moa were on influencing ecosystem processes. We can only wait to see how the mountain responds and watch and learn. To be successful, a restoration programme must have a restoration goal, active intervention to restore plants and/or animals formally present and monitoring of progress (Atkinson 1988). This document presents a restoration plan to ensure the successful restoration of Maungatautari. In summary: Part 1. Background information The New Zealand flora and fauna evolved in the absence of mammalian predation and were ill equipped to deal with terrestrial mammals when they arrived. There have been many extinctions since the arrival of exotic mammals and biodiversity losses are continuing today through predation and habitat fragmentation. The challenge now is to halt this decline and the Maungatautari project offers a way forward in this regard. Located in the middle of the Waikato Basin, Maungatautari represents a significant area of forest remaining here. The bird fauna is now quite depleted and there are a number of mammalian predators present including possum, deer, goats, ship rats, mice, ferrets, stoats, hedgehogs, pigs and cats. Maungatautari was once a high point in a large area of coniferbroadleaved forest, but today it represents nearly half of the forest remaining in the district. Many birds, invertebrates and reptiles that are now extinct or gone from the area would have lived in the forests. Restoration is necessary to restore degraded habitats. Only a fraction of the original fauna remains on Maungatautari and the flora Working Document last revision September 2004 viii

9 has been subjected to intense browsing pressure in the past. Introduced pests, even in very low numbers, can cause the extinction of much of our fauna. After eradication, a fence has the potential to exclude these pests permanently from the mountain and thus allow the recovery of fauna and flora no longer seen on mainland New Zealand. The large area enclosed will allow substantial ecological gains to be made, including an increase in the numbers of native animals on the mountain. A restoration plan is required to ensure the timing and sequencing of reintroductions are carefully planned and to ensure restoration goals are adhered to. Restoration of Maungatautari will aim to return the original ingredients to the mountain so that Maungatautari will reach an ecological balance. The goal is to Restore the diversity, vitality and resilience of the ecosystems of Maungatautari, as close as possible to the original condition, to re-create self-sustaining communities of indigenous plants and animals. Missing plants include: White mistletoe, woodrose Missing animals include: Bellbirds, whiteheads, kaka, weka, takahe, kiwi, kakapo, kokako, saddleback, north Island robin, hihi, kakariki, long-tailed cuckoo, rifleman, petrels, snipe, short-tailed bat, tuatara, Cylodina alani, McGregors skink, Whitakers skink, Oligosoma infrapunctatum, green gecko, forest gecko, common gecko, Pacific gecko, striped gecko, Duvaucel s gecko, Leiopelma waitomoensis, L. markhami, L. hamiltoni, Archey s frog, Hochestter s frog, Mahoenui giant weta, wetapunga, Middle Island tusked weta, weevils, stag beetles, banded and short-jawed kokopu. Part 2 Restoration Translocations and release of indigenous plants and animals must adhere to the Department of Conservation standard operating procedure for the transfer of indigenous fauna and flora. Planting should be restricted to any large areas of pasture encompassed within the fence and to riparian zones surrounding the mountain. Plantings should be sourced from the Maungatautari forest and be species that are naturally replaced in succession. Animals suitable for translocation to the mountain include: weka, takahe, kiwi kakapo, kokako, hihi, Cook s petrel, Mahoenui weta, tuatara, Whitaker s skink, and Archey s frog. The appropriate timing for introducing these animals is discussed. All introductions must be accompanied by the appropriate research and a plan detailing the introduction to ensure maximum chances of success and to ensure permission is gained from the Department of Conservation for the translocation. A timeline for the project is given. Part 3 Monitoring and Risk Assessment Failure to monitor steps and rates of progress in a restoration programme may result in loss of significant information that could Working Document last revision September 2004 ix

10 avoid further mistakes or enable successful programmes to be repeated. Monitoring must be carried out continuously for both pest and reintroduced species. Vegetation and bird monitoring should be carried out routinely using permanent plots and 5-minute bird counts. The mountain should be protected from mammalian pests by the fence, but rigorist pest monitoring will need to be carried out to ensure there are no breaches or failures of eradication. Weeds must be removed and other pests (e.g. exotic invertebrates) must be managed. People must be managed to ensure they do not impact on the restoration and a separate management plan should be written for visitors. Surrounding landowners should be encouraged to plant native forest corridors to provide connections from Maungatautari to the surrounding landscape. A preliminary risk analysis is given. Working Document last revision September 2004 x

11 Acknowledgements We wish to acknowledge the helpful advice received from the following people: Jillana Robertson John Innes Tony Beauchamp (advice on weka) Avi Holzapfel Peter Maddison (invertebrate studies) Liz Grove Elizabeth Bell (advice on shearwater introductions) Carolyn King Paul Jansen (advice on kiwi) John McLennan (advice on kiwi) Keri Neilson Colin Miskelly (advice on snipe) The landowners around Maungatautari for the history of the area Members of the Maungatautari Science and Research Committee Catherine Beard for colouring the vegetation map. Working Document last revision September 2004 xi

12 Part 1. Background Information Celmisia gracilenta (Photo B.D. Clarkson) Working Document last revision September

13 Table of Contents Part 1. Background Information Introduction Characteristics of Maungatautari Reserve area Climate Geology Landforms and soils Flora Vegetation types Fauna Birds Terrestrial invertebrates Reptiles Frogs Fish and aquatic invertebrates Introduced mammals Pre-historic Maungatautari Vegetation Birds Terrestrial invertebrates Fish and aquatic invertebrates Reptiles and amphibians Restoring Maungatautari Why restore Maungatautari? Maungatautari biodiversity losses Mainland islands Ecological benefits Benefits of pest removal The pest proof fence Pest removal The need for a restoration plan What biotic community should we restore to Maungatautari? Goals and restoration targets The ecological goal Ecological objectives Missing plant and animal species Flora Fauna Missing birds Missing mammalian species Missing reptile species Missing terrestrial invertebrate species Missing fish species. 28 References.. 29 Appendix 1: Common and scientific names used.. 33 Appendix 2: Introduced mammals on Maungatautari Working Document last revision September

14 1. Introduction The New Zealand flora and fauna evolved in the absence of mammalian predation and was ill equipped to deal with mammals when they arrived. There have been many extinctions since the arrival of mammals and biodiversity losses are continuing today through predation and habitat fragmentation. The challenge now is to halt this decline and the Maungatautari project offers a way forward in this regard. The New Zealand land mass split from Gondwanaland around 80 million years ago, leaving the flora and fauna here to evolve through a long period of isolation. Animal groups such as terrestrial mammals failed to reach this isolated land mass (apart from three species of bats). This long period of isolation led to a high degree of endemism in the flora and fauna; about 82% of the flora is endemic (Dawson 1988). Both plants and birds evolved in the absence of mammalian predators. Many plants failed to develop defence mechanisms to mammalian predation, such as toxins or spines. Many birds lost the ability to fly and began to nest on the ground. Some birds and insects expanded their niches to fulfil the roles carried out by mammals elsewhere, for example, the weta became the ecological equivalent of a mouse (Field 2001). Ancient animals and plants, such as tuatara and tawari, relicts from Gondwanaland, survived here when they disappeared from the rest of the world. This led to a New Zealand fauna and flora which commonly has low fecundity, long nesting period (or slow seedling growth) and high longevity. Many birds also have large eggs, long incubation periods, long family periods, year round fidelity with a single mate, no migration, early pair bonding and flightlessness. Many plants have attractive foliage or bark and shallow feeding roots (Mark 1984). The long isolation of New Zealand and the unique adaptations of the flora and fauna have meant that the plants and animals were especially vulnerable to new changes. The arrival of humans has had dramatic impacts on the indigenous biodiversity. The arrival of Polynesians ( A.D.) brought to the vulnerable New Zealand fauna, a rat (Rattus exulans) and dog (now extinct). They also carried out massive deforestation through burning and unsustainable hunting. Forty five species of bird went extinct, including all moa species (Mark 1984). The arrival of Europeans from around 1850 brought about an even bigger wave of destruction. Two-thirds of the forest has been lost, and wetlands, dunelands and coastal areas have been extensively modified. A vast range of plants and animals (including possums, goats, deer, rats, stoats and feral cats) were introduced, many of which have become pests (including some 200 plant species) and many that have contributed to extinctions. Extinctions since human arrival in New Zealand in the last years have included (New Zealand's Biodiversity Strategy 1998): Thirty-two percent of indigenous land and freshwater birds Working Document last revision September

15 Eighteen percent of sea birds Three out of seven frogs At least twelve invertebrates such as snails and insects One fish, one bat and perhaps three reptiles About eleven plants At least 1000 taxa of indigenous plants, animals and fungi are threatened with extinction in New Zealand (Saunders and Norton 2001). The challenge now is the stop this decline in our biodiversity. Projects such as the restoration of Maungatautari are an important part of restoring our biodiversity and ensuring no further decline occurs. Located in the centre of the North Island, close to the townships of Cambridge, Te Awamutu, Tirau and Putaruru (Fig. 1.), the mountain provides an opportunity to increase the biodiversity of the Waikato basin with community involvement. To be successful, a restoration programme must have a restoration goal, active intervention to restore plants and/or animals formerly present and monitoring of progress (Atkinson 1988). This document presents a working restoration plan to ensure the successful restoration of Maungatautari. Mt. Maungatautari Figure 1. The location of Maungatautari in the Waikato in the North Island of New Zealand (NZMS Topographical Maps). Working Document last revision September

16 2. Characteristics of Maungatautari Located in the middle of the Waikato Basin, Maungatautari represents a significant area of forest here. The bird fauna is now quite depleted and there are a number of mammalian predators present including possum, deer, goats, ship rats, mice, ferrets, stoats, hedgehogs, pigs and cats Reserve area The Maungatautari scenic reserve (2,390ha) and adjoining Maori and private land constitute about 3,200ha of native forest surrounded entirely by farmland. The area of Maungatautari mountain currently in forest or regenerating native bush is 3363ha (derived from cadastral information provided by Environment Waikato and Waipa District Council) (MacGibbon 2001). Maungatautari reserve was originally set aside in 1927 when it recognised to be of value for climatic and conservation purposes (MacGibbon 2001) Climate The Waikato Basin receives about 2,000 hours of bright sunshine a year and days of fog (de Lisle 1967). The average temperature is around 14 0 C (de Lisle 1967). Rainfall averages cm per year on high ground compared to approximately cm per year on the surrounding flats Geology Maungatautari volcano lies in the southeast of the Middle Waikato Basin, separated from other volcanoes and mountain ranges in the region, and being regarded as a separate volcanic complex (Cole 1978). At 797m above sea level, it is a highly eroded andesite cone (Clarkson 2002) of lower Pliocene age. Made mainly of andesite lava, it is surrounded by a ring-plain of lahar (Cole 1978). The rocky outcrops represent exposures of lava in the central part of the complex (Cole 1978) Landforms and soils The topography of Maungatautari ranges from strongly rolling slopes at the base of the mountain to steep to very steep slopes near the peaks and in the gullies. The soils are a mixture of yellow-brown silt and clay loams which have developed from volcanic ash, and stony red-brown clay loams derived from the parent rock (MacGibbon 2001). The plastic quality of these soils renders them inherently unstable. Mudflows are a distinct possibility on cleared or disturbed land. The streams on the southern, eastern and northern slopes of Maungatautari flow into the Waikato River. Those on the western slopes flow into the Waipa River, before joining the Waikato approximately 200 kilometres further downstream. Working Document last revision September

17 2.5. Flora The forest canopy appears to have remained largely intact throughout the period of human occupation, surviving clearance for agriculture. Some rimu and to a lesser extent tawa and kahikatea were removed for milling from at least 1948 (Gudex 1963) and this continued through at least until the 1980s (MacGibbon 2001). The forest progresses from lowland rimu/tawa forest to upland forest at around 600 metres above sea level, dominated by tawari-kamahi and tawheowheo (Clarkson 2002). Tawari is dominant on the slopes to the south of Maungatautari trig, but kamahi is abundant on the summit as a consequence of forest clearance (Clarkson 2002b). In the lower reaches of the upland forest, tawa is important, and scattered emergent miro are present. On some upper slopes, emergent Hall s totara (Podocarpus hallii) are a feature. The understory commonly consists of Coprosma grandifolia, toro, five-finger (Pseudopanax arboreus), raukawa and horopito (Clarkson 2002b). Alseuosmia macrophylla, a fragrant flowered shrub is abundant in places. Epiphytes commonly include filmy ferns and kidney fern (Trichomanes reniforme). Ferns such as crown fern (Blechnum discolor) and Microlaena avenacea are common on the ground, along with hook-seeded sedges (Uncinia spp.) (Clarkson 2002b). The rocky spurs contain an interesting mix of vegetation, with hedge-like tawheowheo dominating over a shrub layer with mingimingi and a ground layer including Blechnum procerum. The open habitats have an interesting assemblage of small shrubs, sedges, orchids and herbs (Clarkson 2002b), including Morelotia affinis, Orthoceras novae-zeelandiae, Pomaderris ericifolia, Luzula decipiens, Celmisia gracilenta, Rytidosperma gracile, Leptospermum scoparium, Gonocarpus cf. incanus & monanus, and Racomitrium lanuginosum. Vegetation surveys have been carried out by Gudex (1963) and Clarkson and Boase (1986). Gudex (1963) found 191 indigenous vascular taxa and this list has subsequently been added to, making a total of 249 indigenous vascular taxa in 2002 (Clarkson 2002a). The flora of Maungatautari is generally typical of that found in the Waikato region (Clayton-Greene 1976). What is of special interest here, is the absence of species from the upland zone of Maungatautari, which are typically found on other mountains in the region. Missing species include Coprosma colensoi, Raukaua simplex, mountain flax, Hebe macrocarpa, Dracophyllum traversii and D. latifolium. It is important to note that these species are not missing due to browsing pressure, but have never been recorded on the mountain. This is probably because Maungatautari is relatively isolated from other mountain regions. The physical environment of the Waikato basin probably acted as a barrier to the dispersal of many higher-altitude species (Clayton-Greene 1976) and thus lowland vegetation simply expanded its range. The absences of these species are what make the flora of Maungatautari special. Parts of the mountain have not been thoroughly surveyed, including considerable areas on private land. The relatively low impact of pests, timber extraction and land clearance means that Maungatautari is probably more diverse and in better health than many remaining areas in the region (MacGibbon 2001). The few Working Document last revision September

18 weed species that are present are largely confined to the forest margins where they occur Vegetation types The vegetation types present on Maungatautari have been mapped by the New Zealand Forest Service (Fig. 2) to the scale of 1 inch to 1 mile (McKelvey 1963, Nicholls 1963). The forest of Maungatautari is predominately occasional rimu with abundant tawa. Rimu-rata/tawa-rewarewa-mangeao-kamahi is the main forest type below 610m (Nicholls 1963). Other forest types present include thinbarked totara-kamahi-tawari forest; miro/tawa-kamahi-tawari forest; rimu/rata/tawa-pukatea forest; rata/tawa-rewarewa forest; rewarewa-kamahi forest; manuka-kanuka scrub; scrub hardwoods and tree-fern scrub Fauna Based on the presence of kokako, long tailed bat, possibly short tailed bat and a wide variety of the more common forest birds, surveys of Maungatautari undertaken by the Wildlife Service in the mid 1970 s assigned a national habitat ranking of high to outstanding to the forest (Wildlife Service Fauna Survey Record Sheets, Department of Conservation). Kokako are no longer found in the forest but is it likely that they persisted until the early 1980 s (Garland pers.com). Saddleback, North Island robin and hihi all disappeared from the forest in the 1800 s or early 1900 s (MacGibbon 2001). Kiwi, kaka and kakariki all disappeared by the mid 1900 s (MacGibbon 2001) Birds In the summer of 2002, twenty-two bird species were recorded at Maungatautari (Innes et al. 2002). Of these, half were native, including fantail, grey warbler, kereru, bellbird, tui and kingfisher. Exotic species recorded included blackbird, chaffinch and magpie Terrestrial invertebrates Preliminary invertebrate information has been collected by Peter Maddison, and several hundred species have been found, including a number that have not been described previously (P. Maddison pers.comm). Exotic invertebrate pests are likely to include at least three species of introduced wasps Reptiles There is no information to date on the reptile populations on Maungatautari. Working Document last revision September

19 manuka-kanuka scrub, Scrub hardwoods, tree-ferns Rata/tawa-rewarewa Rimu-rata/tawa-rewarewa Rimu-rata/tawa-kamahi Miro/tawa-kamahi-tawari Thin-barked totara-kamahi-tawari Rimu/rata/tawa-pukatea Rewarewa-kamahi Figure 2. The vegetation types present on Maungatautari (McKelvey 1963, Nicholls 1963). Working Document last revision September

20 Frogs There is no information to date on any native frog populations on Maungatautari. The introduced Australian frogs Litoria aurea and/or L. raniformis are likely to be present, especially around the bush margins. They are also likely to travel through the bush looking for new breeding ponds Fish and aquatic invertebrates Preliminary surveys have found the following native fish species are present on Maungatautari: Crans bully, shortfin eel, longfin eel. Fish populations of migratory species are likely to be limited by restricted access to and from the sea on both sides due to dams along the Waikato River preventing fish passage and from the high turbidity of the water in the Waipa. In addition to high turbidity, other habitat changes such as elevated water temperature may limit the fish fauna able to penetrate upstream to Maungatautari tributaries. Thus fish present are likely to be those that can maintain self-sustaining populations while confined to the upper reaches of the streams. Trout are the only alien fish species known to be present, and they are most likely to be confined to the lower reaches of the mountain tributaries. Other than records of koura, little is known of the aquatic invertebrates found in Maungatautari streams Introduced mammals Further information on the mammals present at Maungatautari can be found in Appendix 2. Mammal Possum Goats Pigs Deer Ship rats Mice Stoats Ferrets Cats Hedgehogs Impacts Eat eggs and young birds; strip foliage from trees; carry TB Eat understory vegetation preventing forest regeneration Disturb ground; eat invertebrates, roots, frogs, lizards, ground nesting birds Eat understory vegetation preventing forest regeneration Eat fruit, invertebrates, eggs; can eat enough seed to cause regeneration failure Eat seeds, invertebrates Eat birds, eggs, mice, rats, rabbits, invertebrates, carrion Eat small mammals, birds, eggs Eat small mammals, birds, eggs Eat invertebrates, seeds, lizards, frogs, eggs, young birds The table above addresses the impacts of each animal in isolation; the impact of these species as a guild could be considered to be much greater. Changes in the guild structure from the removal of some of these animals may also significantly change the impacts of the remaining animals to a greater or lesser degree. Working Document last revision September

21 3. Pre-historic Maungatautari Maungatautari was once a high point in a large area of coniferbroadleaved forest, but today it represents nearly half of the forest remaining in the district. Many birds, invertebrates and reptiles that are now extinct would have lived in the forests Vegetation The Waikato Region comprises seven ecological districts. Maungatautari Mountain lies within the Maungatautari ecological district, which covers the low hill country surrounding three old volcanic cones in the central Waikato. Rimutawa forest was once dominant in this district, covering all of the higher hill country, with a smaller area of montane forest on the summit of Maungatautari (Harding 1997). Dense podocarp forest would have dominated the lower altitude country, occurring mostly along the Waikato River valley (Harding 1997). Maungatautari was once a high point in a large area of conifer-broadleaved forest rising above the wetland areas of the Waikato Basin (Leathwick et al. 1995). Tall forest would have covered most of the region, except for extensive areas of bogs and deep swamps (Nicholls 2002). The arrival of Maori to the region in 1500AD coincided with large fires and the destruction of large tracts of the tall forest, which was replaced by scrub and fern lands. It is likely that the vegetation on Maungatautari largely escaped burning (Clayton-Greene 1976). By 1873, the landscape was in the process of being modified into the pasture we see around us. Allom (1873) describes some of the landscape in the journal of his travels to Maungatautari. We now had an ordinary Maori track for some miles in an easterly direction, through rich, undulating, uncultivated land, as we approached the western slopes of Maungatautari. Turning then a little to the left, we ascended one of the long ferny spurs of the Whanake mountain, an offshoot from Maungatautari and pushing through a small patch of bush, arrived at the summit (Allom 1873). Today, Maungatautari provides a forested backdrop to surrounding pasture lands and is a significant area of forest in the district (Table 1), representing nearly half of the forest remaining here. Table 1. The proportion of indigenous vegetation in the Maungatautari Ecological District (87,041 ha) in 1840 and today (adapted from Leathwick et al. 1995). Date Primary Forest (% Secondary forest and land area) Scrub (% land area) Working Document last revision September

22 3.2. Birds Kiwi, kaka, kakariki, hihi, saddleback, kokako, and North Island robin and many other species (see below) would all have been present in the forest of Maungatautari before the introduction of mammalian pests (Worthy and Swabey 2002). The birds that used to live on Maungatautari can be inferred from fossil remains from caves near Waitomo (Worthy 1984). These fossils provide a good indication of what species were likely to have been present at Maungatautari because podocarp forest was present over Waitomo at the time. The forest fauna would have included weka, snipe-rail, takahe, adzebill, kiwi, Eyle s Harrier, laughing owl, kakapo, sub-antartic snipe, kokako, moa, stout-legged moa, Mappin s moa, little bush moa, slender bush moa, giant moa (Worthy 1984), New Zealand hawk (goshawk), giant owlet-nightjar, New Zealand raven and New Zealand wrens (Holdaway 1989). Petrel and snipe species would also have been present throughout the mainland, including inland regions such as Maungatautari (Holdaway 1989: Worthy and Holdaway 1993). It is also thought that black petrels bred in numerous localities in the North Island (Worthy and Holdaway 1993) and until the mid 20 th century, burrows could be found in deep soil within forest (Oliver 1955), including on Maungatautari (G. Taylor pers. comm.). Three species of bats would have been the sole representatives of the mammalian fauna Terrestrial invertebrates Large, flightless, conspicuous endemic invertebrates evolved in New Zealand in the absence of mammalian predators. These species would have been widespread over the New Zealand mainland in the past, including giant weta, large flightless weevils and stag beetles (Meads 1994). Fossil insect species recovered in Waitomo caves included one ground beetle, a zopherid and three weevil species (approaching 20mm in length), all now extinct (Worthy 1984). Maoripahmborus fairburni, Plocamostehus planiusculus and Mecodema crenaticolle were also found (Worthy 1984) Fish and aquatic invertebrates Fish would have had an uninterrupted passage to the sea and migratory species such as koaro, banded kokopu, red fin bullies, torrent fish and possibly shortjawed kokopu would probably have been present (K. Collier, pers. comm.). Aquatic invertebrates, with the exception of the freshwater shrimp, are nonmigratory and communities in Maungatautari streams are unlikely to have been affected by downstream activities. However populations of koura may have declined due to mammal predation. Trout can also adversely affect the aquatic invertebrate fauna, but densities of trout in these mountain streams are likely to be low (K. Collier, pers. comm). Working Document last revision September

23 3.5. Reptiles and amphibians Fossilised tuatara remains have been found in Waitomo (Worthy 1984), indicating that they are likely to have been present on Maungatautari in the past. A diverse range of geckos and skinks would also have been present including Cylodina alani, C. macgregori, and C.whitakeri, C. aenea, C. ornata and Oligosoma striatum. O. infrapunctatum was possibly present in open areas such as the rocky outcrops (Towns et al. 2002). O. homalototum may also have been present: fossil evidence and their present distribution suggest they may have been widespread across the mainland (Towns et al. 2002). Leiopelmatid frogs were widespread on both islands (Holdaway 1989). Leiopelma hamiltoni, L. waitomonensis, L. markhami and L. hochstetteri have been found in cave deposits at Waitomo (Worthy 1987). From the abundant remains found in caves whose entrances were once within forest, it can be assumed that frogs were once a major feature of the pre-human forest (Holdaway 1989). 4. Restoring Maungatautari Restoration is necessary to restore degraded habitats. Only a fraction of the original fauna remains on Maungatautari and the flora has been subjected to intense browsing pressure in the past. Introduced pests, even in very low numbers, can cause the extinction of much of our fauna. A fence offers a way to exclude these pests permanently from the mountain and thus allow the recovery of fauna and flora no longer seen on mainland New Zealand. The large area enclosed will allow substantial ecological gains to be made, including an increase in the numbers of native animals on the mountain Why restore Maungatautari? Ecological restoration is the active intervention and management to restore or partially restore biotic communities, both their plants and animals, as fully functioning systems (Atkinson 1988). Ecological restoration is carried out to provide habitats for threatened plants and animals and/or to replace or repair plant/animal communities that have either been lost or degraded in structure and function (Atkinson 2003) Maungatautari biodiversity losses 1 Despite Maungatautari potentially having a more intact forest canopy and vegetation less damaged by pests compared to other remaining forested areas, it is not necessarily a fully functioning forest ecosystem. Introduced pests, even in low numbers, have caused the local extinction of many indigenous animal species. Kiwi, saddleback, kakariki, kaka, hihi, weka, kokako and many other birds have long gone from Maungatautari, and tuatara, a variety of Working Document last revision September

24 frogs and lizards, giant weta and an unknown array of invertebrates no longer inhabit the mountain. The continued presence of mammalian pests eliminates any opportunity for recolonisation by natural or other means. Even low numbers of pests can cause extinctions, e.g. the presence of less than one stoat per 100 hectares is enough to ensure the native saddleback never returns. The clearance of forest from much of the Waikato basin (and New Zealand) has left a fragmented and patchwork mosaic of indigenous forest across the landscape. Most of the patches are simply too small now to sustain anything like their original biodiversity even if all foreign influences were removed. Some, including Maungatautari are probably large enough to sustain much of the biological diversity of the past, but their isolation means it is unlikely that they will ever regain, by natural means, species that have been lost Mainland Islands 1 Offshore islands have been a focus of threatened species management over the last 40 years. The relatively undamaged state of their forests, their isolation from reinvasion by pests, and the development of technology that has enabled the complete eradication of pests, including rats and mice, from those islands has meant that sensitive threatened animal species such as the kakapo, takahe, saddleback, hihi, kiwi, and tuatara have been reintroduced and managed in relatively natural conditions. However, due to their limited size, it will not be possible to sustain all or even the majority of New Zealand s remaining indigenous biodiversity on offshore islands alone. There is a need to achieve real conservation outcomes at mainland sites. On the mainland, pest control began with Government deer control in the 1950 s and 1960 s, but has only become widespread and intensive in the last eight years (Atkinson 2001). The most intensive level of ecological restoration on the mainland occurs at mainland islands. Mainland islands aim to control animal numbers to as low a level as possible in order to sustain and restore the natural character of the conservation estate (Norton 2000), however reinvasion by mammalian pests cannot be prevented. Using toxic aerial baits, control of 90-95% of possums and rabbits can be achieved, but reinvasion from surrounding areas is rapid (Veitch 1994). In addition, when pest numbers are low, natural foods regenerate and control with baits is made more difficult with control usually having to wait until a time when food supplies are again low (Veitch 1994). The reduction in one prey species can also cause population explosions in other species e.g. mice after the removal of stoats or rats, or alternatively, predators can prey-switch, possibly resulting in the higher mortality of native species e.g. stoats put more effort into hunting birds after rat removal (Veitch 1994). This means that very sensitive plants and animals such as tuatara, stitchbird, kakapo and takahe can presently only survive on pest-free offshore islands. The public has few opportunities to view these species in their natural habitats. Despite the fact that complete pest elimination has not been achieved in mainland islands, there have been some important achievements recorded so far. In several 1 adapted from (MacGibbon 2001) Working Document last revision September

25 locations bird-breeding success has increased noticeably following pest control. At Trounson Kauri Park north of Dargaville (one of the six Department of Conservation Mainland Islands), kiwi nest success of 80% has been achieved. This is one of the highest survival rates achieved amongst kiwi in recent times. There has also been a dramatic increase in kaka chick survival in the Rotoiti Nature Recovery Project (within the Nelson Lakes National Park) compared to other sites. Recorded changes in the number and condition of monitored plants in response to herbivore control have been dramatic in several areas, notably at Paengaroa where threatened plants such as the tree daisy Olearia gardinerii are now flourishing. The development of Mainland Islands, in concept and practice, has directed conservation and biodiversity management on a positive course. However, there are many challenges to be overcome if gains are to be made on a national scale. It is now recognised that if conservation benefits are to be sustained, management must be focused on ecosystem processes as well as on individual species (Saunders and Norton 2001). Mainland Islands are expensive to establish and maintain ($165/ha/year on average in the 1998/99 year (Saunders and Norton 2001). Many more Mainland Islands are necessary to make a difference on a national scale, but Department of Conservation resources alone will not be sufficient. There is a need for greater public participation if biodiversity decline is to be arrested. This increased participation is necessary not only in the form of support and voluntary assistance, but most importantly in the form of land, funding and commitment to on-going management. One of the most pressing practical challenges (and costs) is how to minimise the rate and likelihood of pest reinvasion into a managed Mainland Island. Persistent, on-going ground-based use of traps and poisons to create a buffer around the island and to remove invaders from within is the current practice. Pest-proof fencing offers considerable potential in this regard. Maungatautari is an entirely community driven project. The mountain is an outstanding feature of the landscape and thus many people have strong emotional ties to it. Maori have had strong connections to the mountain since 1400, where it was a strategic defence position and a source of abundant food (Clark and Tairi 1992). These connections have spurred the formation of a trust (Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust) to raise money for the conservation of their mountain. Putting conservation effort into an ecosystem such as Maungatautari requires a change in the philosophy in the way in which conservation dollars are spent in New Zealand. Currently, relatively robust ecosystems receive little in the way of funding (with the exception of mainland islands), with most funding seemingly being spent on saving species on the brink of extinction. The Maungatautari Ecological Island concept represents a new vision in conservation spending. Money is largely coming from private backers and money is being put into an area of relatively high ecosystem health to really enhance what is there before it becomes further degraded. If enough of these projects can be scattered around New Zealand, there should be a real improvement in halting biodiversity losses. Working Document last revision September

26 The concept of restoring Maungatautari should be seen as an extension of the Department of Conservation s mainland island network. Technology now means we can create an island by placing an artificial barrier (fence) around the mountain and the area inside can be kept pest free. Pests can be completely eliminated without the perpetual need for poisons, which may have harmful affects on our environment Ecological benefits 2 The Maungatautari restoration project is different from the majority of mainland island and conservation management projects currently being undertaken in New Zealand because of the plan to eradicate all mammalian pests on a permanent basis. Eradication will be assured by the construction of a pest proof fence that will prevent pest reinvasion. This project differs from the one other significant fenced mainland island, the Karori Wildlife Sanctuary, by its size. Maungatautari encompasses 3363ha of private and public forest, whereas the Kaori Sanctuary covers 250ha. It is because of these differences that the Maungatautari project offers the potential for more comprehensive ecosystem-focused restoration than has been achieved anywhere on the New Zealand mainland. Permanent mammalian pestfree status will create the opportunity for the successful reintroduction of endemic plant and animal species that would otherwise not be possible even in areas where pests could be maintained at very low levels using conventional pest control methods. There are a number of benefits to be gained from eliminating mammalian predators from Maungatautari (from Smuts-Kennedy (1998)): 1. Many populations of native birds, lizards and invertebrates will increase 2. Increase in fruiting due to larger number of pollinators (e.g. tui, kaka) 3. Increased plant regeneration due to less seed predation and increased seed dispersal 4. Potential to become an internationally significant conservation site 5. Potential for Maungatautari to become a source of native plants and animals into the surrounding landscape, thus greatly increasing the biodiversity of the surrounding district. The following attributes of Maungatautari make it an ideal location for ecosystem restoration: 1. Despite being in the centre of some of the most developed and fertile farmland in New Zealand, the forest canopy on Maungatautari has remained largely intact with most of the original tree species still present. 2. Maungatautari escaped the long duration of damage from exotic browsing introduced mammals that so greatly damaged much of this country s indigenous forest. Possums did not occur in large numbers until the 1970 s, and 1080 poisoning in 1997 and 2002 reduced their numbers 2 adapted from (MacGibbon 2001) Working Document last revision September

27 substantially. Deer, goats and pigs have never occurred in large numbers on the mountain and so palatable species have managed to persevere, leaving the forest more floristically diverse than other forests in the region. Enough of the basic ingredients are present to contemplate ecosystemfocused restoration, compared to many mainland forests, which have been impacted so greatly that natural restoration would be unlikely even with all pests removed. 3. At 3363ha, the forest, when all pests are removed, is sufficiently large and diverse to be able to sustain functioning ecosystems and viable natural populations of many native bird, reptile and invertebrate species, including many of the native species that previously occupied the forest. 4. The roughly oval shape of the forest is desirable, having a minimum edge to interior ratio. 5. The mountain and the project provide an unparalleled opportunity to monitor the changes that occur as a consequence of complete mammalian pest removal in a large area, and learn more about the ecology of both pests and native species Benefits of pest removal 3 In order to restore functional, self-sustaining near original ecosystems, complete mammal pest eradication is necessary. If pests are present, even in very low numbers, some indigenous species, especially some sensitive endemic species, may not survive. Many plants and animals have been severely reduced in forested areas because of predation by and in some cases competition from, introduced pests. The complete removal of mammalian pests from Maungatautari can be expected to lead to a significant natural resurgence of many species, particularly invertebrates and highly palatable plants. Kokako breeding success has been shown to be closely related to the intensity of pest control (Innes et al. 1999), and this relationship is also likely for many other bird species. Effective pest control leads to greater breeding success and the greatest gains are made when pest levels are reduced to zero or very near zero (Innes et al. 1999). Numerous studies (e.g. Mark and Baylis 1975, Allen et al. 1984, Mark et al. 1991, Allen et al. 1994, Bockett 1998) have shown the impact of mammalian pests on vegetation. Browsing can reduce the density of the undergrowth, reduce recruitment of seedlings and can change the composition of the forest by selectively removing the most palatable species The pest proof fence Restoration projects that include a predator proof fence are an opportunity to bring sensitive native animals back to the mainland as there is potential for permanent exclusion of mammalian predators. Exclusion of pests using fences may be a cost-effective and sustainable strategy for the ongoing management of introduced 3 adapted from (MacGibbon 2001) Working Document last revision September

28 predators in New Zealand (Clapperton and Day 2001, Day and MacGibbon 2002). Exclusion fencing has many advantages over conventional pest control. There is a limited need for poison regimes, providing a benefit to the environment. Vertebrate pests can be completely eliminated from within the fence, providing greater conservation opportunities than the situation achieved in mainland islands, where pests are maintained at low densities but are still present. Fencing is an effective multi-species control meaning there is no problem with the seesaw effect, where the control of one pest species causes an increase in another (Clapperton and Day 2001). Fencing is also a cost-effective means of pest control compared to conventional methods, even when the greater conservation values that can be achieved with fencing are not included in the analysis (Clapperton and Day 2001). Exclusion fences have been extensively tested by Day and MacGibbon (2002) to find the best design to exclude vertebrate predators. A mesh skirt prevents digging animals from entering, while a smooth rolled cap excludes climbing animals. Electric wires are used to prevent rubbing damage by stock, and as a way of monitoring fence breaches. Fence construction at Maungatautari will proceed in stages as funding becomes available. Initially, an enclosure (approximately 32 hectares) will be built on the northern side of the mountain (Fig. 3), followed by a southern enclosure (76 hectares) (Fig. 3). These enclosures cover two main vegetation types present on Maungatautari: rata/tawa-rewarewa forest and rimu-rata/tawa-kamahi forest. These enclosures will become internal cells within a much larger enclosure once a fence around the perimeter of the forest margin is completed. Once the perimeter fence is completed, an area of approximately 3,200 hectares (depending on the exact fence location) will be available as a pest free island for the conservation of native species. It is envisaged that the two enclosures will then become areas of high visitor use and will fulfil two objectives of the Trust to: Encourage public to visit Make the mountain a regional and focal point for environmental education and advocacy There is the opportunity to enhance visitor experience in these cells by providing such things as interpretation signage or guided tours and feeding stations to attract birds. It may be appropriate to display some species in captivity as part of a captive breeding programme. The two enclosures also provide the opportunity to protect endangered species without compromising the ecological goals of the project, which is to restore the ecosystems to their original state. If there is a good reason for the introduction of species which would not necessarily have been found on Maungatautari originally, provided other criteria are met (see section 2.1.1: Part 2), the enclosures provide a way to contain these species in a defined area and thus not compromise the conservation goals of the rest of the mountain. Working Document last revision September

29 Figure 3. The location of the two enclosures on the mountain. The blue outline is the northern enclosure (approx. 32 ha) and the red outline is the southern enclosure (approx. 76 ha). Image provided by R. MacGibbon. Working Document last revision September

30 4.3. Pest removal Successful eradication of all mammalian pests on offshore islands has been achieved in recent years. Seventeen species of vertebrates (fifteen mammals and two birds) have been successfully eradicated from 140 islands around New Zealand (Saunders and Norton 2001), including some larger than Maungatautari. Little Barrier Island at 3055ha is the largest island from which cats have been eradicated, while Kapiti Island (1970ha) is the largest from which kiore have been eradicated. Norway rats and mice have been removed from several islands. Ship rats have been the most challenging to eradicate, and they have been eradicated from eight islands, the largest of which is approximately 50ha. Advances in Global Positioning System (GPS) technology and a better understanding of effective dose rates (as well as a more effective poison, Brodifacoum) has improved the effectiveness of aerial poison operations and this has contributed to the significant increase in offshore island eradications. It was only twenty years ago that is was thought impossible to eradicate possums from an island as large as Kapiti Island, now eradication of Norway rats is being confidently predicted for all 11,216ha of Campbell Island. A code of practice application is currently in progress to aerially drop Brodifacoum as a cereal bait on the mainland. Poisoning does have an impact on some non-target bird species. For example, a 79% death rate amongst tomtit occurred in Pureora Forest Park following a 1080 carrot drop, before a change in practice reduced this death rate (bait sifted to ensure only large bait was dropped). However, tomtit are able to replace themselves quickly after a single mortality event, but poisoning at too frequent intervals may have long-term detrimental impacts. Pukeko losses have also been recorded as a consequence of Brodifacoum applications (MacGibbon 2001). We anticipate that it will take one or two aerial poison drops of Brodificoum per enclosure to eradicate pests from Maungatautari. Secondary poisoning is likely to reduce population numbers of animals who do not eat the bait. This will be followed by ground based trapping, shooting and poisoning to remove remaining pests. Because the pest removal will be carried out in stages, there are likely to be limited impacts on non-target species, such as tomtits. Mammal pests that are currently present on Maungatautari and will require eradication include: Possums Deer Goats Pigs Ship rats Mice Stoats Weasels Cats Ferrets Working Document last revision September

31 Hedgehogs Other pests present for which control could be considered (complete eradication is not feasible as they can move back into the reserve) include: Introduced wasps Magpie Rosella Turkey Galahs Cockatoo Myna Trout After mammalian control, endemic bird numbers are expected to increase in numbers, as has happened at mainland island sites (Diamond and Veitch 1981, Jones 2000, Pierce 2001, Innes et al. 2002). Exotic bird species and biogeographically recent natives such as fantails, silvereyes and grey warblers are likely to decrease in numbers as the native populations increase (Diamond and Veitch 1981, Jones 2000, Pierce 2001, Innes et al. 2002), suggesting there will be little need for further control effort. Farmers can be encouraged to control exotic birds on the bush margins, but there is likely to always be a mix of indigenous and exotic birds around the margins. More research should be carried out into the impact of rosellas on native birds as there is a possibility that they out compete native parakeets (Wright and Clout 2001). 5. The Need for a Restoration Plan A restoration plan is required to ensure the timing and sequencing of reintroductions is carefully planned and so that restoration goals are adhered to. Strict guidelines and protocols are necessary for the ecological restoration of an area such as Maungatautari. The timing and sequence of reintroductions requires careful planning to ensure new species do not negatively impact on restoration goals. Too often there has been little consideration of the impacts of the species to be released on the indigenous biota of its new location (Towns et al. 1990). Timing and sequencing of reintroductions needs careful planning. In the past, some species have been detrimental to the host environment and produced conflicting conservation goals. For example, tuatara is a top predator, and releasing it too early in a small area could reduce the chances of successfully establishing species lower in the food chain, such as giant weta. Without adequate guidelines, unrestricted translocations to Maungatautari could lead to it becoming little more than an open zoo. Translocations must be consistent with the ecological goals. Planning is necessary for the translocation of highly cryptic species such as skinks and geckos. Genetically distinct species may already be present on Maungatautari and the introduction of the same species from elsewhere may actually decrease biodiversity. Working Document last revision September

32 Successful ecological restoration requires a plan that pays attention to the following processes (as outlined by Hobbs (1999): 1. Establishing restoration goals and measurable success criteria 2. Identifying degrading processes or factors limiting system recovery 3. Reversing or ameliorating degradation and factors limiting recovery 4. Incorporating restoration into management strategies 5. Monitoring key system variables and checking against success criteria Working Document last revision September

33 How the restoration plan fits into the Maungatautari project Restore the diversity, vitality and resilience of the ecosystems of Maungatautari Educational/recreational plan Management Plan Restoration Plan Restore the forest Restore the wildlife Restore waterways Forest ecosystem is self sustainable Connections to landscape Complete fence Appoint project manager for pest control Pre-operation monitoring on mountain Appoint person to manage wildlife Workplans for each species Secure funding and approval for translocations Plant riparian zones Monitor water quality Appoint monitoring coordinator Monitor forest condition and wildlife Locals plant riparian zones and corridors on surrounding land Operation plans for pest control developed Carry out pest control Make wildlife introductions Prove pest-free status Monitor introductions Working Document last revision September

34 6. What Biotic Community Should We Restore to Maungatautari? Restoration of Maungatautari will aim to return the original ingredients to the mountain so that Maungatautari will reach an ecological balance. In the process of restoring Maungatautari, it is important to have a clear idea of what biotic community should be restored to the mountain. The Trust s vision is: Maungatautari has been restored to a largely indigenous, diverse, fully functional, (near) self-sustaining forest, permanently free of mammalian pests. By aiming to return Maungatautari to an original condition, we may be less likely to make new errors. In this situation, original can be defined as either prehuman (no mammals present apart from the native bats) or pre-european (suggesting that kiore and kuri should be present) (Atkinson 2001). Limits to the concept of an original pre-human ecosystem are species extinctions. For example, we will never know exactly how moa browsing influenced forest vegetation (Atkinson 2001). Therefore the restoration of Maungatautari will attempt to achieve the best possible pre-human condition while acknowledging that some important components of the pre-human ecosystem have been lost forever. This means that we can put back the original ingredients, remove those that don t belong and leave the mountain to reach its own ecological balance. To create an original ecosystem, only species originally present on Maungatautari should be returned if they are no longer present. This will avoid the creation of a zoo or a mismatch of threatened species that would not naturally associate with each other, trying to co-exist. However, there could be justification for introducing closely related and/or ecologically similar taxa as analogues for extinct species (more detail in section 2.1.1: Part 2). Species introductions should be based on evidence that they were an original component of the ecosystem. In some cases, it will be difficult to determine whether certain species were originally present on the mountain. In these cases, consultation with the appropriate experts must be carried out before an introduction is made. Any species that were not an original component but are of national importance and are critically threatened on the mainland should undergo rigorous selection criteria to ensure their introduction does not conflict with the restoration goals. There may be an opportunity to contain such species within the fenced enclosures once the perimeter fence is complete. Restoration goals must acknowledge the fact that we can never know for certain all of the original components of the ecosystem and that these components would never have been static over evolutionary timescales anyway. Therefore the restoration target must accommodate normal ecological processes that cause changes to plant and animal numbers. In addition, some species may require special habitats or food sources which Maungatautari cannot provide, given that in the past, such a mountain may have only been a small part of a habitat range for Working Document last revision September

35 some species. In these cases, it may be appropriate to restore some sites in a different way to the majority of the mountain. For example, it may be appropriate to leave pasture grass inside the fenced area as habitat for takahe. Recognising that the past landscape would have been a mosaic of different vegetation types, such an action is not necessarily in conflict with the goal of restoring the mountain to its original condition. 7. Goals and Restoration Targets Restore the diversity, vitality and resilience of the ecosystems of Maungatautari, as close as possible to the original condition, to recreate self-sustaining communities of indigenous plants and animals The ecological goal The primary goal for restoring Maungatautari is to: Restore the diversity, vitality and resilience of the ecosystems of Maungatautari, as close as possible to the original condition, to re-create self-sustaining communities of indigenous plants and animals Ecological objectives 1. The existing indigenous biodiversity of Maungatautari is retained (no further decline occurs) 2. Weeds and pests are removed and mammalian pests are permanently excluded. 3. Key species and processes are identified and returned to restore food web interdependencies and ecosystem processes. 4. Where possible, biodiversity previously lost from Maungatautari (but still present in NZ) is returned, using genetic stocks as close as possible to what was naturally found on Maungatautari. 5. The waters draining the mountain are clean, and the waterways provide habitat for a diverse aquatic flora and fauna. 6. The forest ecosystem is restored to a self-sustaining state where minimal human management or intervention is required. 7. Maungatautari becomes a source for dispersal of indigenous plants and animals to the surrounding landscape and region. 8. Maungatautari becomes better connected to surrounding landscapes, through the development of corridors that allow for dispersal and migration of indigenous species, enhancing downstream and mountain ecosystem function. Working Document last revision September

36 8. Missing Plant and Animal Species Missing plants include: White mistletoe, woodrose Missing animals include: Bellbirds, kaka, weka, takahe, kiwi, kakapo, kokako, saddleback, north Island robin, hihi, red and yellow kakariki, long-tailed cuckoo, rifleman, petrels, snipe, short-tailed bat, tuatara, Cylodina alani, C. macgregori, C.whitakeri, Oligosoma infrapunctatum, green gecko, forest gecko, common gecko, Pacific gecko, striped gecko, Leiopelma waitomoensis, L. markhami, L. hamiltoni, L. archeyi, L. hochstetteri, Mahoenui giant weta, wetapunga, Middle Island tusked weta, giant flightless weevils, stag beetles, banded and short-jawed kokopu Flora The flora of Maungatautari is relatively intact, and it is likely that most of the original components of the flora will return to a natural balance once mammalian pest numbers are reduced. Populations should be given the opportunity for expansion naturally before reintroductions are made. Green mistletoe (Ileostylus micranthus) is restricted to one location outside of the reserve boundary. Seeds from this population could be used to start its re-establishment in the reserve if it does not expand naturally after pest removal. It is also important that the extant population is conserved during the construction of the perimeter fence. White mistletoe (Tupeia Antarctica) was last recorded on the mountain by Gudex in There have been no further sightings since. Dactylanthus taylorii has never been recorded on Maungatautari, but this does not mean it never existed here. Thorough searches should be made for Dactylanthus before any reintroductions are considered. Searches should be carried out during flowering at the end of January/beginning of February. Dactylanthus is present on Mt. Pirongia and use to be found on Sanatorium Hill in Cambridge, so there is a good chance it is still present on Maungatautari. However, if none is found, Dactylanthus is a potential subject for reintroduction. Question: Is Dactylanthus still present on Maungatautari? 8.2. Fauna Missing birds Birds that have been lost from Maungatautari, but are not extinct and thus could be reintroduced to the mountain include: Bird species Evidence for living at Maungatautari in past Weka Fossil evidence (Worthy 1984) Takahe Fossil evidence (Worthy 1984) Kiwi Fossil and presence pre-1980 (Worthy 1984) Kakapo Fossil evidence (Worthy 1984) Working Document last revision September

37 Snipe Fossil evidence (Worthy 1984) Kokako Fossil and presence pre-1980 (Worthy 1984): Local residents pers. comm.) Saddleback Presence in forest in 1800 s (MacGibbon 2001) North Island robin Presence in forest in 1800 s (MacGibbon 2001) Hihi Presence in forest in 1800 s (MacGibbon 2001). Found throughout North Island prior to 1800 (Castro et al. 1994). Kaka Presence in forest in early 1900 s (MacGibbon 2001) Kakariki Presence in forest in early 1900 s (MacGibbon 2001) Long tailed cuckoo Likely to still pass through forest on annual migration (C. Smuts-Kennedy pers. comm.) Whitehead Presence in the forest in the past. Rifleman Presence in lowland NZ forest (Atkinson and Millener 1991) Petrel species Fossil evidence in many cave and dune deposits throughout NZ. Some persistence of mainland colonies and species that breed in forested hill country on pest-free islands (Holdaway 1989). Snipe Fossil evidence throughout the North Island that snipes were once widespread (Roberts and Miskelly 2003). The North Island subspecies was the now extinct Coenocorypha barrierensis, but another snipe subspecies could fill this niche Missing mammalian species Long tailed and short tailed bat species were present in the 1970 s (MacGibbon 2001). Short-tailed bats are probably no longer present on Maungatautari (although thorough surveys will be needed to confirm this), but long tailed bats are still present. Question: Are short-tailed bats still present on Maungatautari? Missing reptile species Tuatara would have been present on Maungatautari, and fossilised remains have been found in Waitomo (Worthy 1984); the subfossil distribution includes most parts of the North and South Islands (Holdaway 1989). Skinks that would have been present include: Cylodina alani, C. macgregori, and C.whitakeri (currently confined to rat-free islands). Cylodina aenea, C. ornata and striped skinks are probably still present and monitoring should be carried out to confirm this. Speckled skinks were Working Document last revision September

38 possibly present in open areas such as the rocky outcrops (Towns et al. 2002). Chevron skinks may also be a suitable candidate for reintroductions. They are now confined to Great Barrier and Little Barrier Islands, but fossil evidence and their present distribution suggest they may have been widespread across the mainland (Towns et al. 2002). These skinks are currently classified as threatened. Geckos on Maungatautari would have included green gecko, forest gecko and common gecko. Pacific gecko and striped gecko may also have been present. Duvaucel s gecko is now only present on rat free islands, but occurs in the subfossil record for this area (T. Whitaker pers. comm.). Frog species that could have lived on Maungatautari include L. hamiltoni, L. archeyi and L. hochstetteri (Worthy 1987); these species are now confined to small populations Missing terrestrial invertebrate species Determining the past distribution of weta is difficult and their distribution and population decline has been poorly recorded (Sherley 1998). Mahoenui giant weta are confined to one known natural population in the King Country, however they may have been more widespread in the past. Mahoenui weta are classified as category C (Molloy and Davis 1994) (third priority for conservation action). Little Barrier Island giant weta (wetapunga) were present on the mainland, but are now confined to Little Barrier Island (Smuts-Kennedy pers. comm.). Middle Island tusked weta may also have been present. Large flightless weevils and stag beetles are also likely to be missing from Maungatautari and surveys are needed to confirm what is missing from the invertebrate fauna. Question: What invertebrate species are missing from Maungatautari? Missing fish species Banded and short-jawed kokopu would have been present in the streams of Maungatautari (K.Collier pers. comm.). Lack of a migratory passage to the sea is likely to limit the successful reintroduction of these species. Working Document last revision September

39 References Allen, R. B., W. G. Lee, and B. D. Rance Regeneration in indigenous forest after eradication of Norway rats, Breaksea Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Botany 32: Allen, R. B., I. J. Payton, and J. E. Knowlton Effects of ungulates on structure and species composition in the Urewera forests as shown by exclosures. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 7: Allom, A. J A Holiday Trip to Maungatautari Being The Journal of a Tour to the Waikato, Via Ohinemuri and the Upper Thames. Wilkinson and Horton Printers, Grahamstown. Atkinson, I. A. E Presidential address: opportunities for ecological restoration. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 11:1-12. Atkinson, I. A. E Introduced mammals and models for restoration. Biological Conservation 99: Atkinson, I. A. E A Restoration Plan For Mangere Island, Chatham Islands Group. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Atkinson, I. A. E., and P. R. Millener An ornithological glimpse into New Zealand's pre-human past. Acta XX Congressus Internationalis Ornithologici: Bockett, F. K Ungulate effects on tawa (Beilschmiedia tawa) forest in Urewera National Park. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Brown, K., J. Innes, and R. Shorten Evidence that possums prey on and scavenge bird's eggs, birds and mammals. Notornis 40: Castro, I., E. O. Minot, and J. C. Alley Feeding and breeding behaviour of Hihi or Stichbirds Notiomystis cincta recently transferred to Kapiti Island, New Zealand, and possible management alternatives. Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Clapperton, B. K., and T. D. Day Cost-effectiveness of Exclusion Fencing For Stoat and Other Pest Control Compared With Conventional Control. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Clark, T.-K., and L. Tairi Te Ihingarangi. A History of the Karapiro- Maungatautari Area. Electricity Corporation of New Zealand. Clarkson, B. D. 2002a. Indigenous vascular plants of Maungatautari mountain scenic reserve. in. Unpublished Species List (based on visits ). Clarkson, B. D. 2002b. Upland forests and special open habitats. Pages in B. D. Clarkson, M. Merrett, and T. Downs, editors. Botany of the Waikato. Waikato Botanical Society Inc., Hamilton. Clarkson, B. D., and M. Boase Maungatautari Mountain Field Trip: 15 June Pages in Rotorua Botanical Society Newsletter. Clayton-Greene, K. A The vegetation of Mt. Karioi and of forested areas in the Waikato, North Island, New Zealand. Unpublished MSc Thesis. University of Waikato, Hamilton. Cole, J. W Distribution, petrography, and chemistry of Kiwitahi and Maungatautari volcanics, North Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics 21: Dawson, J Forest Vines to Snow Tussocks: The Story of New Zealand Plants. Victoria University Press, Wellington. Working Document last revision September

40 Day, T. D., and R. J. MacGibbon Escape behaviour and physical abilities of vertebrate pests towards electrified and non-electrified fences. unpublished internal report Xcluder TM Pest Proof Fencing Company. de Lisle, J. F The climate of the Waikato basin. Earth Science Journal 1:2-16. Diamond, J. M., and C. R. Veitch Extinctions and introductions in the New Zealand Avifauna: Cause and effect? Science 211: Field, L. H The Biology of Wetas, King Crickets and their Allies. CAB International, Wallingford. Fitzgerald, B. M., and J. A. Gibb Introduced mammals in a New Zealand forest: long-term research in the Orongorongo Valley. Biological Conservation 99: Gudex, M. C The native flora of Maungatautari and the Kaimai Range, and the distribution of native plants in the Waikato. Transactions of the Royal Society of New Zealand Botany 2: Harding, M Waikato Protection Strategy: A report to the Forest Heritage Fund Committee. Forest Heritage Fund, Wellington. Holdaway, R. N New Zealand's pre-human avifauna and its vulnerability. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 12 (supplement): Innes, J., B. Burns, N. Fitzgerald, D. Thornburrow, and C. Watts Premammal eradication bird counts at Maungatautari and Pirongia, November-December Prepared for: Foundation for Research, Science and Technology, with Landcare Research NSOF funding Landcare Research Contract Report: 0203/095, Hamilton. Innes, J., H. R., I. Flux, P. Bradfield, H. Speed, and P. Jansen Successful recovery of North Island kokako Callaeas cinerea wilsoni populations, by adaptive management. Biological Conservation 87: Jones, G Five-minute bird count surveys. Department of Conservation, Gisborne. Leathwick, J. R., B. D. Clarkson, and P. T. Whaley Vegetation of the Waikato Region: Current and Historical Perspectives. in E. Waikato, editor. Landcare Research, Hamilton. MacGibbon, R Maungatautari Ecological Restoration Project Plan. Prepared for: Waipa District Council, The Department of Conservation and The Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust. Natural Logic Ltd, Taupo. Mark, A. F Effects of introduced mammals on natural ecosystem values in New Zealand. Pages 7-14 in P. R. Dingwall, editor. Protection and Parks. Essays in the preservation of natural values in protected areas. Proceedings of Section A4e, 15th Pacific Science Congress, Dunedin, Department of Lands and Survey, Wellington. Mark, A. F., and G. T. S. Baylis Impact of deer on Secretary Island, Fiordland, New Zealand. Proceedings of the New Zealand Ecological Society 22: Mark, A. F., G. T. S. Baylis, and K. J. M. Dickinson Monitoring the impacts of deer on vegetation condition of Secretary Island, Fiordland National Park, New Zealand: a clear case for deer control and ecological restoration. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 21: McKelvey, P. J Synecology of the west Taupo indigenous forest. In. New Zealand Forest Service Bulletin 14. Working Document last revision September

41 Meads, M. J Translocation of New Zealand's endangered insects as a tool for conservation. Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. New Zealand's Biodiversity Strategy Our Chance to Turn the Tide. A draft strategy for public consultation. Nicholls, J. L N66 Matamata. in Ecological Survey of New Zealand's Indigenous Forests: type map series no.2., Forest Research Institute, Rotorua. Nicholls, J. L History of the vegetation. Pages in B. D. Clarkson, M. Merrett, and T. Downs, editors. Botany of the Waikato. Waikato Botanical Society Inc., Hamilton. Norton, D. A Mainland Habitat Islands: A Vision for New Zealand Nature Conservation. Department of Conservation. Oliver, W. R. B New Zealand Birds, 2 edition. A.H. and A.W. Reed, Wellington. Pierce, R. J Diurnal birds - five minute counts. Department of Conservation, Whangarei. Roberts, A., and C. Miskelly Recovery plan for the snipe species of New Zealand and the Chatham Islands (Coenocorypha spp.) Tutukiwi. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Saunders, A., and D. A. Norton Ecological restoration at Mainland Islands in New Zealand. Biological Conservation 99: Sherley, G. H Threatened weta recovery plan. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Smuts-Kennedy, C The Conservation Potential of Great Mercury Island. Research Report for Diploma in Wildlife Management. University of Otago, Dunedin. Towns, D. R., C. H. Daughery, and P. L. Cromarty Protocols for translocation of organisms to islands. Pages in D. R. Towns, C. H. Daughery, and I. A. E. Atkinson, editors. Ecological Restoration of New Zealand Islands. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Towns, D. R., K. A. Neilson, and A. H. Whitaker North Island Oligosoma spp. skink recovery plan. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Veitch, C. R Habitat repair: a necessary prerequisite to translocation of threatened birds. Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Worthy, T. H Faunal and floral remains from F1, a cave near Waitomo. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 14: Worthy, T. H Palaeoecological information concerning members of the frog genus Leiopelma: Leiopelmatidae in New Zealand. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 17: Worthy, T. H., and R. N. Holdaway Quaternary fossil faunas from caves in the Punakaiki area, West Coast, South Island, New Zealand. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 23: Worthy, T. H., and S. E. J. Swabey Avifaunal changes revealed in Quaternary deposits near Waitomo Caves, North Island, New Zealand. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 32: Working Document last revision September

42 Wright, D., and M. N. Clout The Eastern Rosella (Platycerus eximius) in New Zealand. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Working Document last revision September

43 Appendix 1: Common and Scientific Names Used Plants Alseusomia macrophylla Alseusomia macrophylla Bush rice grass Microlaena avenacea Coprosma colensoi Coprosma colensoi Crown fern Blechnum discolour Dracophyllum traversii Dracophyllum traversii Filmy ferns Hymenophyllum Fivefinger Pseudopanax arboreus Green mistletoe Ileostylus micranthus Halls totara Podocarpus hallii Haumakaroa Ruakaua simplex Hook seeded sedges Uncinia spp. Horopito Pseudowintera axillaris Ikaika Orthoceras novae-zeelandiae Kahikatea Dacrydium dacrydioides Kamahi Weinmannia racemosa Kanuka Kunzea ericoides Kidney ferns Trichomanes reniforme Luzula decipiens Luzula decipiens Mangeo Litsea calicaris Manuka Leptospermum scoparium Mingimingi Cyathodes juniperina Miro Prumnopitys ferruginea Morelotia affinis Morelotia affinis Mountain flax Phormium cookianum Neinei Dracophyllum latifolium Pekapeka Celmisia gracilenta Piripiri Gonocarpus cf. incanus & monanus Racomitrium lanuginosum Racomitrium lanuginosum Rata Metrosideros spp. Raukawa Ruakaua edgerleyi Raurekau Coprosma grandifolia Rewarewa Knightia excelsa Rimu Dacrydium cupressinum Rytidosperma gracile Rytidosperma gracile Small kiokio Blechnum procerum Tauhinu Pomaderis ericifolia Tawa Beilschmiedia tawa Tawari Ixerba brexioides Tawheowheo Quintina serrata Toro Myrsine salicina Totara Podocarpus totara Tree daisy Olearia gardinerii Tree fern Dicksonia or Cyathea spp. White mistletoe Tupeia Antarctica Wood rose Dactylanthus taylorii Birds Adzebil Aptornis otidiformis Bellbird (korimako) Anthornis melanura Black petrel Procellaria parkinsoni Blackbird Turdus merula Brown kiwi Apteryx australis Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs Working Document last revision September

44 Cockatoo Cook's petrel Eyle's harrier Fantail Galah Giant moa Giant owlet-nightjar Grey warbler Hihi Kaka Kakapo Kakariki (yellow crowned) Kereru (wood pigeon) Kingfisher Kokako Laughing owl Little bush moa Long-tailed cuckoo Magpie Mappin's moa Moa Myna North Island robin NZ hawk (goshawk) NZ raven NZ wren Petrel Riffleman Rosella Saddleback Shining cuckoo Slender bush moa Snipe Snipe-rail Stout legged moa Sub-Antartic snipe Takahe Tomtit Tui Turkey Weka Whitehead Mammals Deer Dog (Kuri) Cat Ferret Goat Hedgehog Long tailed bat Mouse Pig Polynesian rat (Kiore) Possum Rabbit Cacatua galerita Pterodroma cookii Circus eylesi Rhipidura fuliginosa Cacatua roseicapilla Dinornis giganteus Megaegotheles novaezealandiae Gerygone igata Notiomystis cincta Nestor meridionalis Strigops habroptilus Cyanoramphus auriceps Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae Halcyon sancta Callaeas cinerea wilsoni Sceloglaux albifacies Anomalopteryx didiformis Eudynamys taitensis Gymnorhina tibicen Pachyornis mappini Euryapteryx curtus Acridotheres tristis Petroica australis Circus eylesi Corvus moriorum Acanthisittidae Procellaria spp. Acanthisitta chloris Platycercus eximius Philesturnus carunculatus Chrysococcyx lucidus Dinornis struthoides Coenocorypha Capellirallus karamu Euryapteryx geranoides Coencorypha aucklandica Notornis mantelli Petroica macrocephala Prosthemadera novaeseelandiae Meleagris gallopavo Gallirallus australis Mohoua albicilla Cervus spp. Canis familiaris Felis cattus Musteal furo Capra hircus Erinaceus europaeus occidentalis Chalinolobus tuberculatus Mus musculus Sus scrofa Rattus exulans Trichosurus vulpecula Oryctolagus cuniculus Working Document last revision September

45 Ship rat Short tailed bat Stoat Reptiles Chervon skink Common gecko Copper skink Duvacel's gecko Forest gecko Green gecko McGregor's skink Ornate skink Pacific gecko Robust skink Speckled skink Striped gecko Striped skink Tuatara Whitaker's skink Amphibians Archey's frog Frog (native) Frog (native) Green bell frog Hamilton's frog Hochstetter's frog Southern bell frog Invertebrates Ground beetle Koura Mahoenui giant weta Middle island tusked weta Stag beetles Wasps Weevils Weta Wetapunga Fish Banded kokopu Crans bully Koaro Longfin eel Redfin bully Shortfin eel Short-jawed kokopu Torrent fish Trout (rainbow) Trout (brown) Rattus rattus Mystacina tuberculata rhyacobia Mustela erminea Oligosoma homalototum Hoplodactylus maculatus Cylondia aenea Hoplodactylus duvaucelii Hoplodactylus granulatus Naultinus spp. Cylondia macgregori Cylondia ornata Hoplodactylus pacificus Cylondia alani Oligosoma infrapunctatum Hoplodactylus stephensi Oligosoma striatum Sphenodon punctatus Cylondia whitakeri Leiopelma archeyi Leiopelma waitomonesis Leiopelma markhami Litoria aurea Leiopelma hamiltoni Leiopelma hochstettei Litoria raniformis Carabidae Paranephrops planifrons Deinacrida n. sp. Motuweta isolata Dorcus spp. Vespula spp. Anagotus spp. Deinacrida spp. Zopheid Maoripatimborus fairburni Plocamstetus planiusculus Mecodema crenaticolle Deinacrida heteracantha Galaxias fasciatus Gobiomorphus basalis Galaxias brevipinnis Anguilla dieffenbachii Gobiomorphus huttoni Anguilla australis Galaxias postivectis Cheimarrichthys fosteri Oncorhynchus mykiss Salmo trutta Working Document last revision September

46 Appendix 2: Introduced Mammals on Maungatautari According to locals, the first possum was heard at Maungatautari in Introduced mammalian pests were significantly later to reach Maungatautari than other parts of New Zealand and other parts of the Waikato, probably due to the isolation of Maungatautari from other areas of indigenous forest and the barrier created by the Waikato River. Botanical surveys by Gudex (1963) refer to a few opossums in the bush but little damage to the vegetation compared to the vegetation destruction ( mahoe, fuchsia, kohekohe and other trees being stripped of their foliage ) he records on Sanatorium Hill Scenic Reserve. Possum damage was apparent by the mid 1970 s and possum densities increased through the 1980 s and 1990 s causing significant damage to the vegetation (MacGibbon 2001). The once abundant, palatable fivefinger (Pseudopanax arboreus) declined and is now an uncommon plant around the forest margins, due to both browsing pressure and loss of suitable habitat from land clearance up to the bush line. Northern rata and kamahi have also declined and these have been found to provide about 60% of possum s leaf diet elsewhere (Fitzgerald and Gibb 2001). Intense possum browsing for three years on northern rata has been found to be sufficient to kill trees when browsing coincides with other stress factors, such as drought (Fitzgerald and Gibb 2001). Possums are also responsible for a decline in bird populations and there is documentation of significant possum predation on birds and their eggs (Brown et al. 1993). Possums are possibly the most serious mammal pest in New Zealand (Atkinson 2001). Bovine tuberculosis was detected in cattle adjacent to Maungatautari in 1994/95 and this led to a 1080 poison drop on the mountain in 1997 to reduce possum numbers and thus reduce the spread of the disease. The possum kill was very successful: residual trap catches measured only 2% (average number of possums caught per 100 trap nights) following poisoning compared to 40% prior. Secondary poisoning is likely to have reduced ferret, stoat and rat populations as well. A further poison drop was carried out in August 2003, which will have ensured possum numbers remain low. Goats, pigs and domestic livestock have also caused damage to the vegetation. Goats were present on the higher levels in the 1960 s (Gudex 1963), and there is possibly still a small population present as evidenced by goat browse of kamahi on the rocky outcrops (Waikato Botanical Society Field Trip 2003). Goats browse selectively on vegetation, leading to a gradual replacement with unpalatable plants (Fitzgerald and Gibb 2001). Wild pigs were present by 1983, and pig sign can be seen on the mountain today. Pigs root up the ground while searching for roots, rhizomes, earthworms, beetles and other invertebrates (Atkinson 2001). Their diet includes invertebrates, frogs, lizards and groundnesting birds (Atkinson 2001). There are no historical records of deer on the mountain, but some fallow deer are present (Garland pers. comm.). In extreme cases, deer can remove an entire forest understory (Mark and Baylis 1975). Until fencing in the 1980 s, domestic livestock probably caused the most damage to the understory vegetation. Working Document last revision September

47 Today, the densities of the larger mammalian pests are generally low. Possum numbers were reduced by a 1080 poison drop in August Light goat damage can be seen on the upper portions of the mountain and light to moderate pig sign can be seen. Domestic livestock are fenced out of the scenic reserve but may have access to privately owned parts of the forest (MacGibbon 2001). No surveys have been carried out to estimate the numbers of small mammals (rats, ferrets, stoats, mice) on the mountain. Ship rats are likely to be present in high numbers due to abundant food sources (seeds, fruit, invertebrates, eggs). Ship rats are significant contributors to nest mortality and have been implicated in the extinction of a subspecies of robin, fernbird, snipe, wren, South Island saddleback and greater short-tailed bat on Stewart Island where the ship rat was the only mammalian predator present (Mark 1984). They also eat large amounts of podocarp fruit and seedlings causing regeneration failures (Mark 1984, Allen et al. 1994). Mice feed on seeds and insects. They also appear to play a role in a chain of events, potentially leading to greater bird predation. When mice populations increase, they provide an increased food supply for stoats whose population also increases. When mice populations decline to normal, stoats may prey more on birds (Fitzgerald and Gibb 2001). Eradication of mice has been followed by increases in the numbers of skinks, geckos, weta and arthropods (Atkinson 2001). Stoats are likely to be the principle mustelid inhabitant of Maungatautari (MacGibbon 2001). Stoats feed on birds, eggs, mice, rats, rabbits, invertebrates and carrion. As few as 1.3 stoat per 100ha is enough to prevent the successful growth of a kiwi population. Stoats are the main predators of young kiwi, yellowheads and kaka (Atkinson 2001). Ferrets are generally found in forest margins and farmland and feed predominantly on small mammals, small birds and eggs. Ferrets are one of the main predators of adult kiwi (Atkinson 2001). Local residents recall a ferret farm near the mountain about 40 years ago, which resulted in the farmer releasing the ferrets into the bush at Maungatautari when the project failed. Feral and domestic cats are likely to be present in the forest fragments on farmland and along the forest margin, posing a threat to birds. Feral cats have wiped out Stephens Island bush wren, several land bird species on Herekopare Island and severely depleted kakapo on Stewart Island (Mark 1984). Dogs, including farm dogs, do not pose a threat to any bird species currently present on Maungatautari, but will be a serious threat to kiwi where they coincide. Hedgehogs have generally been thought of as living in open country, cities and suburbs, but recently evidence has been gained that they are significant predators and competitors in lowland forests (Atkinson 2001). Hedgehogs eat a wide range of seeds, invertebrates, lizards and frogs and may even be egg predators of ground nesting birds (Atkinson 2001). They also take the young of ground-nesting birds (Smuts-Kennedy, pers. obs.). Working Document last revision September

48 Part 2. Restoration At Totaranui (Golden Bay) there is a pair of NZ falcon killing kukupa on the camp ground flats. I am hoping we will liberate weka back into that environment and the camp users (>3000 campers a year) want them back. Would you risk liberating weka in the presence of NZ falcon? Would you remove the falcon? It is all a value judgment and what is valued and what can be sustained in an area as part of a natural managed process. My advice for your project is get the valued judgments sorted out first (don't put Tuatara on the list if they are nice to have and compromise the species of higher value judgment), define achievable objectives and take calculated risks if need be to get there T. Beauchamp, Department of Conservation (Weka Recovery Group). Kiwi (Photo B.D. Clarkson) Working Document last revision September

49 Table of Contents Part 2. Restoration Restoration goal Protocols for reintroduction Justification for releasing non-original species Use of replacement species Measuring restoration success Restoration of the plant community Areas for planting re-establishment Sources of plants Restoration of the animal community Timing and sequence of introductions Treating the mountain as a whole Using the enclosures for optimum conservation gain Work plans for species introductions Restoration timeline.. 55 References. 56 Appendix 3: Common and scientific names used. 59 Appendix 4: SOP for translocations. 61 Appendix 5: Relevant species information for introductions 62 Appendix 6: Bibliography of translocation publications.. 70 Working Document last revision September

50 1. Restoration Goal The primary goal for restoring Maungatautari is to: Restore the diversity, vitality and resilience of the ecosystems of Maungatautari, as close as possible to the original condition, to re-create self-sustaining communities of indigenous plants and animals. Ecological Objectives: 1. The existing indigenous biodiversity of Maungatautari is retained (no further decline occurs) 2. Weeds and pests are removed and mammalian pests are permanently excluded. 3. Key species and processes are identified and returned to restore food web interdependencies and ecosystem processes. 4. Where possible, biodiversity previously lost from Maungatautari (but still present in NZ) is returned, using genetic stocks as close as possible to what was naturally found on Maungatautari. 5. The waters draining the mountain are clean, and the waterways provide habitat for a diverse aquatic flora and fauna. 6. The forest ecosystem is restored to a self-sustaining state where minimal human management or intervention is required. 7. Maungatautari becomes a source for dispersal of indigenous plants and animals to the surrounding landscape and region. 8. Maungatautari becomes better connected to surrounding landscapes, through the development of corridors that allow for dispersal and migration of indigenous species, enhancing downstream and mountain ecosystem function. Working Document last revision September

51 TP TP PT from PT Sympatric PT 2. Protocols for ReintroductionsTP No species should be introduced to any islands naturally free of mammalian predators (this does not apply to Maungatautari as mammalian predators are already well established). Species which can survive only in locations free of exotic predators should, if possible, be translocated to habitats specifically managed for their needs by eradication of introduced predators. Geographic distances between source populations and proposed new sites should be kept to a minimum, especially when past geographic range can only be inferred 5 Where related species do not occur sympatricallytp PT, leapfrogging populations into induced sympatry should be avoided. Individuals released into new locations should be derived from known wild populations or purpose-bred captive stocks. Genetic analysis, or other resource inventory, should be carried out to determine the possible relationships of the source populations to other populations. Translocations and release of indigenous plants and animals must adhere to the Department of Conservation standard operating procedure for the transfer of indigenous fauna and flora (Appendix 4). 4 The number of animals to be released to establish viable populations requires a thorough understanding of the ecological requirements of the species to be introduced and an assessment of the attributes of the environment being provided (Towns et al. 1990). Research suggests that some translocated birds form new familiar bonds and that familiar groups (including breeding pairs) break up after translocation. This means that birds for relocation can often be selected based on a broad genetic makeup rather than familiar groups for equal breeding success (Armstrong et al. 1994). Translocated animal species should be quarantined to ensure seed in the gut does not compromise the restoration (Wright and Cameron 1990) and to ensure animals are free of any diseases resulting from captive breeding (Towns et al. 1990). For example, captive rearing and release of desert tortoise (Xerobates agassizii) in North America introduced a upper respiratory disease not found in wild populations which has reduced wild populations by 60%; potentially a bigger decline than would have been caused had no intervention taken place (Towns et al. 1990). 4 Towns et al. (1990) 5 populations are those that could interbreed, but do not usually do so because of various differences e.g. timing of flowering. These populations may become separate species through natural selection, given enough time. Working Document last revision September

52 Translocations of wild caught animals are much more successful (75%) than those raised in captivity (38%) (Towns et al. 1990) so where possible, wild animals should be released. Accurate records need to be kept for any reintroductions to add to the body of knowledge on successful translocations, including documentation of failed introductions, which are underrepresented in the literature. This information would be valuable to help make more introductions successful. There are many possible causes for failure of an introduction, but many causes can be easily fixed if managers are aware of them. For example, monitoring showed that kakapo failed to breed when moved from Stewart Island to Little Barrier due to an inadequate natural food supply for chicks and the inability of kakapo to switch to alternative natural food sources (Veitch 1994). The Secychelles Magpie-robin was thought to be in decline due to cat predation. However elimination of cats did not result in a population increase and it was then discovered that fresh water was a limiting factor in the survival of these birds (Veitch 1994). Black robin breeding success was hampered by seabirds returning to their burrows at night and knocking nests out of trees (Veitch 1994). For each species to be introduced (both plant and animal), a detailed introduction plan must be made (section 7: this part). The species ecology must be studied to determine whether the new habitat is adequate, how many individuals must be translocated to ensure a viable genetic population results and the time-frame over which these introductions should occur (i.e. a large number in one release or smaller numbers in multiple releases). Also included should be information on what the source population should be. Budgets will also be an important part of an introduction plan to ensure there are adequate resources available for extensive monitoring after each introduction Justification for releasing non-original species The restoration goal for Maungatautari is to restore the ecosystems as close as possible to the original condition. This means that only species that once would have lived on Maungatautari should be introduced. However, at some stage, there may be a good argument for introducing a species that was not originally found here. This may be the case when a species highly sensitive to predators has no chance of survival elsewhere (for example, there are no suitable off-shore island habitats). Pest-free Maungatautari may then be looked to as the next most suitable home to save this species from extinction. When considering the introduction of non-original species, the following points should be addressed: 1. Is it completely necessary to introduce this species to Maungatautari? Is this species likely to go extinct if it is not introduced? The reasons for the introduction of a non-original species need to be transparent and valid. 2. Can the species be contained in one of the enclosures? Is it likely to escape over the fence and thus compromise the originality of the entire mountain, or can it be contained in a pest-free area, thus leaving the majority of the mountain in an original restored state? Working Document last revision September

53 3. Will the introduction of this species have detrimental effects on species introduced to fulfil the restoration goal or those already present on the mountain? For example, will it outcompete or hybridise with species originally found on Maungatautari? Use of replacement species Substituting for locally extinct species Most species suggested for reintroduction are locally extinct, and only survive in a few very protected places such as offshore islands or in captivity. For example, kakapo are now functionally extinct in their natural habitat (North, South and Stewart Islands), and so survival of this species depends on introductions outside their natural range (if only off-shore islands are relied on). Maungatautari provides an opportunity to establish kakapo populations within its natural range but from a South Island population (non-original stock). In these cases, although they are of different genetic stock, the only choice is to introduce them to fulfil their roles in ecosystem functioning. Substituting for species that have been lost completely The aim of a substitution is to establish a functional surrogate for the extinct taxon, so that trophic relationships that formerly operated between that taxon and other plants and animals are reinstated in the restoration process (Atkinson 2001). However, options for substitution are limited when a species has been lost completely. There is unlikely to ever be a suitable substitution for the moa species that would have been present on Maungatautari. One option is to look for the most closely related species as a replacement, even if that taxon is in another country (Atkinson 1988). For example, rock wren may be a suitable replacement for the extinct bush wren (Atkinson 1988), provided that rock wren can adapt to the new environment and thus fulfil a lost ecological niche. In our opinion, introducing taxa from other countries is not consistent with the restoration goals and the unpredictability of releasing new organisms means that the risk involved is too high to justify any potential benefits in ecosystem function. Question: Is the restored biotic community likely to be closer to the original with or without the proposed surrogate species? What is the cost to ecosystem function from not returning a missing species? Working Document last revision September

54 3. Measuring Restoration Success A number of measures of ecological success can be applied to this project. Each ecosystem becomes self-sustaining o There is recruitment of new individuals into the population o There is a decrease in any weed problems There is an increase in the abundance and diversity of native flora and fauna. Key processes are restored to within their range of natural variability All vertebrate pests are permanently excluded Species reintroduced to the mountain establish successful breeding populations Quantitative measurements of restoration success will be obtained with a comprehensive monitoring programme (Part 3) covering all aspects of the flora and fauna. Questions: How much monitoring do we need to do to show successes? What are the key processes that will tell us the most about the ecosystem? How do we detect low pest numbers to ensure they remain excluded from the mountain? Working Document last revision September

55 4. Restoration of the Plant Community Planting should be restricted to any large areas of pasture encompassed within the fence and to riparian zones surrounding the mountain. Plantings should be sourced from the Maungatautari forest and be species that are naturally replaced in succession Areas for plant re-establishment Although no formal monitoring of the forest has yet been carried out, site visits indicate that the forest canopy is in a reasonably intact condition. The understory contained a number of species highly palatable to possum and deer, such as tree fushia and five finger (pers. obs.). Rata, previously severely depleted on the rocky outcrops (Bruce Dean pers. comm.) is now recovering there. Green mistletoe, last seen in the 1960 s, has also recently been found. Although there are keen volunteers ready to carry out planting, artificial planting can do more harm than good and should be restricted to areas where it is really needed, such as the regeneration of highly modified sites (Wright and Cameron 1990). Planting also carries a risk of weeds (e.g. in potting mix), pathogenic micro-organisms in plant material or potting mix that may affect natural populations, invertebrate browsers such as snails which may not be present currently, and a risk of genetic pollution (Wright and Cameron 1990). Bird and wind dispersal should be relied on to naturally revegetate areas and effort is best spent on monitoring and eradication of exotic flora and fauna than on revegetation (Wright and Cameron 1990). Natural regeneration will result in a more diverse species composition and therefore richer bird habitat than can be gained by planting a limited number of species (Wright and Cameron 1990). The speed of regeneration on northern New Zealand islands is widely underestimated once mammalian predators are removed (Wright and Cameron 1990). Only limited planting will be required at Maungatautari. The forest will regenerate naturally once mammalian seed predators and grazing pressures are removed (Mark and Baylis 1975, Allen et al. 1984, Mark et al. 1991, Allen et al. 1994, Bockett 1998) and bird pollination and seed dispersal increases. The only areas that will potentially require planting at Maungatautari are areas of pasture that are within the pest proof fence (estimated to be less than 100ha (Jim Mylchreest pers comm.)) and areas disturbed during the construction of the fence. Depending on the individual sizes of these areas, they will require little planting. A further point that needs consideration are the bird species that will be introduced to the area and what habitat requirements they have. For example, if takahae is introduced, it may require a grass area for grazing. Other species such as kiwi and tuatara can also benefit from open areas. If planting is carried out, it is important to plant pioneer species so that over time they will be replaced naturally with canopy species; this will allow planting effects to be minimised (e.g. if planted in rows) and will allow natural populations to build up. Care should be taken to ensure any plants brought into Maungatautari for whatever reason (e.g. to save it from extinction elsewhere) are not closely related taxa whose Working Document last revision September

56 ranges do not normally overlap and where brought into contact, there is the potential for unnatural hybrids to occur (Wright and Cameron 1990). The Maungatautari flora is noteworthy because of the absence of species typical of other mountains in the region. However, some species are likely to have been severely reduced by predation and may have disappeared from the region. Species such as Dactylanthus and white mistletoe may have gone from the forest. It is important that extensive searches for these species are carried out as the population may expand naturally following the removal of introduced predators, and if not, any individuals found should be the first choice for seed propagation to artificially establish populations. Only when it is certain that no natural populations exist on the mountain, should the next closest seed source be used to establish a population. Vegetation monitoring should be carried out for at least five years after pest removal to ensure any existing populations are not expanding naturally before reintroductions are made Sources of plants Where there is a choice of plant material available for reintroduction, it should come from a source as close as possible to the mountain and/or from a similar ecological zone. Question: Is the planting of large grass areas going to be beneficial, harmful or neutral to the species proposed for introduction? Working Document last revision September

57 5. Restoration of the Animal Community Animal species that may be considered for re-introduction to Maungatautari are listed below. The timing and order of introductions is discussed in section 6 (this part) and further information on specific details of their lifestyle and habits are included in appendix 5. Bird species Weka Takahe Kiwi Kakapo Kokako Saddleback North Island robin Hihi Kaka Kakariki Long-tailed cuckoo Whitehead Rifleman Cooks Petrel Black Petrel Chatham Island Snipe Invertebrates Mahoenui weta Comments Likely to have considerable impacts on many other species. Needs to be introduced late in the restoration or be confined to one enclosure. Requires some open habitat. Requires some grass habitat. May have some impact on other species. May impact on other species, especially invertebrates Have specific high nutrient food requirements for breeding e.g. rimu fruit. Require low pest numbers for breeding. May impact on some invertebrate species. Are known to eat giant weta. The impact of robins on tomtits is worth investigating before introductions are made. May need to introduce before bellbird populations increase. May establish naturally, but have also been successfully translocated elsewhere. Both red and yellow crowned parakeets should be established on the mountain. The effect of rosella on kakariki populations should be investigated before translocation. Likely to establish naturally once whitehead establish. Anecdotal evidence that they are present on the mountain. Will probably need introductions to either restore or re-establish a population. No successful introductions have yet been made for rifleman. Can only translocate young birds before fledging (strong natal imprinting). Can only translocate young birds before fledging (strong natal imprinting). Similar ecological niche as the extinct North Island Snipe. All snipe are now critically endangered, and require absolute protection from rats. Introduction of an ecologically equivalent species of snipe will help to both restore ecosystem balance at Maungatautari and help to secure the survival of NZ snipe. Successfully translocated elsewhere. Working Document last revision September

58 Reptiles Tuatara Robust skink McGregor s skink Whitaker s skink Striped skink Chevron skink Speckled skink Duvaucel s gecko Pacific and striped gecko Frogs Hamilton s frog, Hochstetter s frog, Archey s frog Fish Banded and shortjawed kokopu Have been successfully translocated elsewhere. Debate needed on the appropriate source population. Skinks have been tanslocated successfully elsewhere. May still be present in epiphytes and requires survey before introductions are made. Only known populations on Great Barrier and Little Barrier Islands. Was possibly present in open areas such as rocky outcrops. Requires rat free area. Surveys will be required before any gecko introductions to determine what species still survive on the mountain. Need to survey for existing frog populations and ensure habitat and climate is suitable for reintroductions. A risk assessment with respect to exotic frogs should also be undertaken. Reintroductions are unlikely to succeed due to a lack of a suitable passage between the mountain and the sea. Working Document last revision September

59 6. Timing and Sequence of Introductions Monitor the outcomes of introductions to ensure populations are expanding Remain patient to ensure the appropriate order of species introductions is carried out Follow DOC translocations SOP The timing of predator/competitor introductions can be critical to the survival of other species with equally important conservation goals. For example, weka will be detrimental to the survival of skinks (Towns et al. 1990). There is also a potential conflict between releasing giant weta and McGregor s skink and the release of takahe (Towns et al. 1990). Releasing kiwi may conflict with management of invertebrates. Therefore, it is important to consider all ecological relationships and to manage top predator releases appropriately. It may be a matter of waiting for populations of vulnerable species to build up to sustainable levels where some level of predation is acceptable. Alternatively, it may be appropriate to confine certain species to the two enclosures where they will not conflict with other conservation goals. In some cases, it may be feasible to reduce the time frames proposed here by separating introductions not only in time but in space. Maungatautari is probably large enough that species with slow dispersal rates can be released in one area with a long lead time before they encounter predators. To carry this out successfully, thorough research into each species (as should be done in the introduction work plan) will be needed to determine how far the species is likely to disperse after release and how long populations take to increase. The probable length of time for predator species to reach them should also be considered Treating the mountain as a whole The following order of reintroductions treats the mountain as a whole and does not concern the use of the two enclosures. It should be recognised that the timeframes proposed are a guide only. Some introductions may establish more quickly than anticipated or breeding success may be higher than anticipated. In these cases, it may be suitable to release competitors and/or predators earlier than anticipated. Alternatively, some species may be more difficult to establish than anticipated due to introduction failures or to problems sourcing individuals for translocation. In these cases, it will be necessary to remain patient (especially if the species is an early introduction) to ensure restoration goals are not compromised by mistiming of introductions. Working Document last revision September

60 1. Introduce in first 3 years of restoration once pest free status has been confirmed (2-3 yrs following poisoning). Species Comments Takahe May want to confine it initially to areas where no invertebrates or reptiles have been introduced. It may also impact on Cook s petrels so fences to exclude takahe from petrel sites may be required. Kiwi May want to confine it initially to areas where no invertebrates have been introduced Kokako Will help to disperse seeds and thus increase forest regeneration Kaka Some may arrive naturally Whitehead* Population may increase naturally if there is still a small population on the mountain. Cooks petrel* 1 Petrels have a proven establishment record to use as a model for introduction. Source of birds would be Little Barrier Island. Translocate young chicks and have a CD playing bird calls. Black petrel 1 Introduce after Cook s petrel (Cook s petrel should establish faster and be a more visible species for the public) Chatham Island Snipe species show absolutely no tolerance of rats, cats Snipe* 1 or weka and therefore must not be put in an enclosure with weka (Roberts and Miskelly 2003). In particular, the Chatham Island snipe has never encountered weka (weka are on the main Chatham Island but not on the particular island where snipe are) so it is unlikely to have any defensive mechanisms. Rifleman* 1 Will need to establish good translocation techniques as they have not been successfully translocated before. All species of skinks Adequate surveying for existing populations needs to and geckos that may be occur before introductions are made. May need to suitable for reintroduction confine initially to areas protected from predators. Mahoenui Weta* Successfully translocated and shown to survive in bush habitat. Middle Island or Can produce a population in captivity. Raukumara tusked weta* Other invertebrates Adequate surveying needs to occur before introductions Hochstetter s and Archey s frog* are made Adequate surveying for both frog populations and suitable habitats needs to be carried out before introductions are made. 2. Introduce in 3-10 years following pest eradication, once populations of those introduced in the first phase have established. 1 Requires considerable logistical resources for establishment. Working Document last revision September

61 Species Saddleback North Island robin* Hihi (stichbird)* Kakariki* Long-tailed cuckoo Wood rose* Short-tailed bats* Mistletoe* Comments Impacts on invertebrates, so need to ensure its release does not impact on protected invertebrate species. Possibly could be introduced quite early but would need advice from threatened insect ecologists about the potential impact on insect populations. May impact tomtit populations. Perhaps introduce early to avoid competition with bellbirds. Need to provide supplementary feeding and possibly nest boxes. Yellow crowned are partially insectivorous. May need to establish after hihi to allow hihi to find suitable nest holes first. May also need to remove rosellas from the bush to prevent nest competition. Possibly best to establish yellow-crowned first as it is the smaller (less dominant) of the two. Dependent on whitehead establishing, but should establish naturally. Only if extensive surveys fail to find any natural populations Will require a complex operation to establish bats, potentially requiring captive breeding and perhaps some artificial roosts if they are not already present on the mountain. Only if extensive surveys fail to find any natural populations 3. Introduce in years time to allow populations of prey and weaker competitors to establish. Species Weka Kakapo* Comments Weka can impact greatly on other species. Need to be confined to one area on the mountain. Pressure on leaf litter invertebrates and ground lizard fauna. Not likely to be compatible with Cook s petrels and snipe. Introduction will depend on expansion of existing populations to have enough surplus individuals to establish a population here, although there is no ecological reason why they can t be released sooner. The fence design may need modification to prevent kakapo climbing out (e.g. hood on inside). Tuatara May impact on invertebrate and lizard fauna. Establishment may be more successful if petrels are already established or if artificial burrows are provided (experiment currently underway at Tiritiri Matangi to test this). *Can be released early (low ecological impact) if populations for translocation can be sourced. Working Document last revision September

62 Questions: Where is the appropriate place for release of weka to ensure it does not impact other species that are trying to establish? What are the source populations for all species to be translocated? Species that will require considerable debate include tuatara and kiwi. Is the mountain big enough to introduce species more quickly because they can be separated from competitors spatially? Does the fence need to be modified to keep some native species in e.g. a mesh skirt on the inside to prevent tuatara digging out? How long do we wait to see if a population (which exists in very low numbers already) will increase naturally after pest removal? What will ecosystem recovery be like if no reintroductions are made? When is a translocation deemed to be successful and how do we measure success? 6.2. Using the enclosures for optimum conservation gain The two enclosures (cells) (Fig. 2: part 1.) provide an opportunity to manage the reintroduction of species on Maungatautari as their impacts can be contained within one enclosure. This will not only give maximum ecological benefits, but will provide the maximum visitor experience. The northern enclosure will be the first enclosure completed and this enclosure must show that mammalian pest eradication has been successful and that the fence cannot be breached. It can also provide an opportunity to see what happens to ecosystem recovery on a mainland site when pests are removed, but no further manipulation is made. The larger southern enclosure will be able to provide a better visitor experience than the northern enclosure, without the same compromises to ecological goals due to visitor impacts. The construction of two enclosures presents the opportunity to experiment with pest eradication techniques and monitoring of low density pest populations. MEIT needs to clearly define the objectives for these enclosures e.g. economic, showcase or ecological. Which of these is the primary objective will affect management decisions about any introductions here and the timing of these introductions. However, these objectives are not necessarily incompatible, and if managed correctly all of the above objectives could be met. From an ecological perspective, it is important that this restoration plan is still followed for the restoration of the enclosures. The only difference should be the manipulation of some animal species to enhance visitor experience e.g. by providing supplementary feeders to attract birds when supplementary feeding is not strictly necessary. The first animals introduced to these enclosures should be tolerant of additional poison drops (or be able to be easily removed off-site for a short period), should they be necessary following an unforeseen fence breach by pests. For example, flaws in the fence design at Karori meant that baby mice were able to enter the enclosure. Working Document last revision September

63 These mice have been very difficult to control due to abundant food sources. If a similar situation was to occur at Maungatautari, it would be advantageous to carry out another aerial poison drop to quickly eliminate the pest, without significantly affecting native animals. When pests are initially removed from these enclosures, the larger mountain area will still contain pests. This means it will be important to only release animals here that will stay within the confines of the enclosure, or the adults have a reasonable chance of survival against pests, until there is a larger pest-free area for them to expand into. Potential candidates for early reintroduction here include: Kiwi (possibly as an operation nest egg situation) Cook s Petrels Supplementary feeding of tui and bellbird to attract them to the enclosure Skinks, geckos and endangered invertebrates should not be considered for introduction into these enclosures given the presence of top predators here, unless it can be shown that impacts from predation will be minimal (by carrying out an introduction work plan). Most native reptiles are slow breeders and translocated populations will take some decades to increase to the point where they become part of the visitor experience. One of the enclosures may ultimately prove to be the most suitable home for weka. Weka are a charismatic bird and will be popular with visitors. However, weka negatively impact many native species and have been implicated in the extermination of several other species from islands to which they have been introduced (Beauchamp et al. 1999). Confining weka to a restricted area provides an opportunity to establish weka on Maungatautari without impacting on other sensitive species that may be establishing elsewhere on the mountain. Any introductions of species for the purposes of visitor displays (such as caged skinks and geckos) should recognise that these introductions do not directly contribute to the restoration goals of Maungatautari. However, where it is necessary to captive-rear animals on site or to contain introductions in a cage prior to release, thought should be given to placing such cages within either of the enclosures for the purposes of visitor experience, when it is not going to compromise ecological outcomes to do so. Questions: Should one cell be kept free of introductions to see what happens to ecosystem recovery naturally after the removal of pests? What species are most suitable for release into the enclosures to provide a visitor experience? Working Document last revision September

64 7. Work Plans for Species Introductions All introductions must be accompanied by the appropriate research and a plan detailing the introduction to ensure maximum chances of success and to ensure permission is gained from the Department of Conservation for the translocation. Workplans must follow the DOC SOP for translocations. Plans will be necessary to: a) ensure the genetic stock of the population to be introduced is appropriate (not a hybrid species or inbred population where this can be avoided) and that the source population is genetically as close as possible to that likely to have been on Maungatautari. b) ensure that the habitat is suitable for the species being introduced (e.g. that invertebrate populations are high enough to sustain an invertebrate feeder) c) ensure that potential interactions between species are given due consideration (it may be necessary to delay some introductions to allow other populations to build to sustainable levels) d) ensure that the best practice methods for translocation and establishment of the species are known and followed to maximise success e) ensure that adequate numbers of individuals are translocated to ensure a viable genetic population develops f) determine the timeframe of release of individuals: is it best to release a large number at once or carry out more frequent introductions of smaller numbers? g) ensure that adequate funds are available for monitoring after release h) ensure equipment (such as radio transmitters) and personnel are available to carry out post-release monitoring and support (e.g. to provide supplementary feeding if necessary) i) facilitate the official approvals necessary for a translocation and to provide information to stakeholders about the translocation Workplans should follow the Department of Conservation Standard Operating Procedure for Translocations. This document is given in Appendix 4 6. Examples of workplans are available from the DOC Conservancy Office and should be consulted. Communication with the appropriate species recovery group or similar at the time of developing a workplan will also ensure the efficiency and accuracy of the plan. 6 Note that the version printed here is not necessarily the most up to date version. Anyone planning to use this document should consult with their local Department of Conservation office to ensure the most recent version is used. Working Document last revision September

65 8. Restoration Timeline Appoint pest removal project manager and pest eradication company Complete fence construction around enclosures Begin monitoring flora and fauna to establish baseline data before pest eradication Community begins planting surrounding landscape with ecosourced plants Complete basic path network inside enclosures to control visitor impacts and to ensure permanent plots are not within path network Carry out aerial poison operation in enclosures Employ person to research/write species introduction plan/liaise with species recovery groups Develop educational/recreational plan to manage/control visitor numbers on mountain Complete construction of perimeter fence Carry out aerial poison operation over mountain Complete visitor facilities carparks, toilets, paths, guides, signs etc Monitor pest numbers and forest recovery Ensure pest-free status is achieved ongoing monitoring Begin animal introductions as outlined in this plan Introduce some animals that can withstand small mammalian pests and additional poison drops (and won t prevent other species being introduced later) The whole mountain is pest-free and large numbers of tourists come to see the wildlife on Maungatautari. Loud birdsong can be heard in the forest and bellbirds, tui and kereru are abundant in the district. Some species introductions are still occurring and this serves to keep public interest in the project high. Working Document last revision September

66 References Allen, R. B., W. G. Lee, and B. D. Rance Regeneration in indigenous forest after eradication of Norway rats, Breaksea Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Botany 32: Allen, R. B., I. J. Payton, and J. E. Knowlton Effects of ungulates on structure and species composition in the Urewera forests as shown by exclosures. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 7: Anon Management of five bird species in the Chatham Islands. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Armstrong, D. P., T. G. Lovegrove, D. G. Allen, and J. L. Craig Composition of founder groups for bird translocations: does familiarity matter? Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Atkinson, I. A. E Presidential address: opportunities for ecological restoration. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 11:1-12. Atkinson, I. A. E Introduced mammals and models for restoration. Biological Conservation 99: Basse, B., and J. A. McLennan Protected areas for kiwi in mainland forests of New Zealand: how large should they be? New Zealand Journal of Ecology 27: Beauchamp, A. J., D. J. Bulter, and D. King Weka (Gallirallus australis) recovery plan. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Bell, B. D Translocation of Fluttering Shearwaters: developing a method to reestablish seabird populations. Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Berry, R Reintroduction of kaka (Nestor meridionalis septentrionalis) to Mount Bruce Reserve, Wairarapa, New Zealand. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Bockett, F. K Ungulate effects on tawa (Beilschmiedia tawa) forest in Urewera National Park. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Bull, L Pycroft's petrel transfer. Rare Bits. The newsletter about threatened species work, Department of Conservation 48. Castro, I., J. C. Alley, R. A. Empson, and E. O. Minot. 1994a. Translocation of Hihi or Stichbird Notiomystis cincta to Kapiti Island, New Zealand: transfer techniques and comparison of release strategies. Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Castro, I., E. O. Minot, and J. C. Alley. 1994b. Feeding and breeding behaviour of Hihi or Stichbirds Notiomystis cincta recently transferred to Kapiti Island, New Zealand, and possible management alternatives. Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Gaze, P Tuatara Recovery Plan Department of Conservation, Wellington. Graeme, A., and B. Graeme Against the odds: captive rearing and population restoration of North Island Weka Gallirallus australis greyi by a non- Working Document last revision September

67 government organisation. Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Hitchmough, R New Zealand Threat Classification System Lists. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Innes, J., B. Burns, N. Fitzgerald, D. Thornburrow, and C. Watts Pre-mammal eradication bird counts at Maungatautari and Pirongia, November-December Prepared for: Foundation for Research, Science and Technology, with Landcare Research NSOF funding Landcare Research Contract Report: 0203/095, Hamilton. Innes, J., and I. Flux North Island Kokako Recovery Plan. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Jamieson, I. G., and C. J. Ryan Causes of low reproductive success of translocated takahe (Porphyrio mantelli) on predator-free islands. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Mark, A. F., and G. T. S. Baylis Impact of deer on Secretary Island, Fiordland, New Zealand. Proceedings of the New Zealand Ecological Society 22: Mark, A. F., G. T. S. Baylis, and K. J. M. Dickinson Monitoring the impacts of deer on vegetation condition of Secretary Island, Fiordland National Park, New Zealand: a clear case for deer control and ecological restoration. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 21: McGuinness, C. A The conservation requirements of New Zealand's nationally threatened invertebrates. Department of Conservation, Wellington. McHalick, O Translocation Database Summary. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Merton, D. V Transfer of saddlebacks from Hen Island to Middle Chicken Island January, Notornis 12: Roberts, A., and C. Miskelly Recovery plan for the snipe species of New Zealand and the Chatham Islands (Coenocorypha spp.) Tutukiwi. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Sherley, G Translocations of the Mahoenui giant weta Deinacrida n. sp. and Placostylus land snails in New Zealand: what have we learnt? Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Thomas, B. W., and A. H. Whitaker Translocation of the Fiordland Skink Leiolopisma acrinasum to Hawea Island, Breaksea Sound, Fiordland, New Zealand. Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Towns, D. R., C. H. Daughery, and A. Cree Raising the prospects for a forgotten fauna: a review of 10 years of conservation effort for New Zealand reptiles. Biological Conservation 99:3-16. Towns, D. R., C. H. Daughery, and P. L. Cromarty Protocols for translocation of organisms to islands. Pages in D. R. Towns, C. H. Daughery, and I. A. E. Atkinson, editors. Ecological Restoration of New Zealand Islands. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Towns, D. R., K. A. Neilson, and A. H. Whitaker North Island Oligosoma spp. skink recovery plan. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Veitch, C. R Habitat repair: a necessary prerequisite to translocation of threatened birds. Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Working Document last revision September

68 Worthy, T. H Palaeoecological information concerning members of the frog genus Leiopelma: Leiopelmatidae in New Zealand. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 17: Worthy, T. H., and R. N. Holdaway Quaternary fossil faunas from caves in the Punakaiki area, West Coast, South Island, New Zealand. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 23: Wright, A. E., and E. K. Cameron Vegetation management on northern offshore islands. Pages in D. R. Towns, C. H. Daughery, and I. A. E. Atkinson, editors. Ecological Restoration of New Zealand Islands. Conservation Sciences Publication No. 2. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Working Document last revision September

69 Appendix 3: Common and Scientific Names Used Plants Fivefinger Green mistletoe Rata Tree fushia White mistletoe Wood rose Birds Bellbird (korimako) Black petrel Black robin Brown kiwi Bush wren Campbell Island snipe Chatham Island snipe Cook's petrel Desert tortoise Fluttering shearwater Hihi Kaka kakapo Kakariki (red crowned) kakariki (yellow crowned) Kokako Little spotted kiwi Long-tailed cuckoo Moa Mottled petrels North Island robin Pycrofts petrel Riffleman Rock wren Saddleback Secychelles Magpie-robin Takahe Tomtit Tui Weka Whitehead Mammals Deer Feral cats mouse Possum Short tailed bat Reptiles Chervon skink Common gecko Copper skink Pseudopanax arboreus Ileostylus micranthus Metrosideros spp. Fushia exorticata Tupeia Antarctica Dactylanthus taylorii Anthornis melanura Procellaria parkinsoni Petroica traversi Apteryx australis Xenicus longipes stokesii Coenucorypha aucklandica nov. sp. Coenucorypha pusilla Pterodroma cookii Xerobates agassizii Puffinus gavia Notiomystis cincta Nestor meridionalis Strigops habroptilus Cyanoramphus novaezelandiae novaezelandiae Cyanoramphus auriceps Callaeas cinerea wilsoni Apteryx owenii Eudynamys taitensis Euryapteryx curtus Pterodroma inexpectata Petroica australis Pterodroma pycrofti Acanthisitta chloris Xenicus giluiventris Philesturnus carunculatus Copsychus sechellarum Notornis mantelli Petroica macrocephala Prosthemadera novaeseelandiae Gallirallus australis Mohoua albicilla Cervus spp. Felis cattus Mus musculus Trichosurus vulpecula Mystacina tuberculata rhyacobia Oligosoma homalototum Hoplodactylus maculatus Cylondia aenea Working Document last revision September

70 Duvacel's gecko Fiordland skink Forest gecko Green gecko McGregor's skink Ornate skink Pacific gecko Robust skink Speckled skink Striped gecko Striped skink Tuatara Whitaker's skink Amphibians Hamilton's frog Hochstetter's frog Archey's frog Invertebrates Mahoenui giant weta Middle Island tusked weta Wetapunga Fish Short-jawed kokopu Banded kokopu Hoplodactylus duvaucelii Leiolopisma acrinasum Hoplodactylus granulatus Naultinus spp. Cylondia macgregori Cylondia ornata Hoplodactylus pacificus Cylondia alani Oligosoma infrapunctatum Hoplodactylus stephensi Oligosoma striatum Sphenodon punctatus Cylondia whitakeri Leiopelma hamiltoni Leiopelma hochstettei Leiopelma archeyi Deinacrida n. sp. Motuweta isolata Deinacrida heteracantha Galaxias postivectis Galaxias fasciatus Working Document last revision September

71 Appendix 4: SOP for Translocations This document is available as a separate file. IMPORTANT: BEFORE USING THE PRINTED SOP CHECK THAT THIS IS THE LATEST VERSION UPDATED VERSIONS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION WEB SITE ( OR BY CONTACTING YOUR NEAREST DOC OFFICE. Working Document last revision September

72 Appendix 5: Relevant Species Information for Introductions Birds Weka Detailed information on weka in New Zealand is available in the Weka National Recovery Plan by Beauchamp et al. (1999), which, along with advice from the relevant experts, should be consulted to form a working plan for the reintroduction of weka. Weka are currently critically endangered, and the recovery plan recommends the establishment of a large population in a pest-free environment. Currently four sub-species of weka are recognised, and the North Island sub-species is Gallirallus australis greyi. Weka should happily live in a mature forest type habitat with a small area of grassland which will be provided by incorporating some pasture within the fence enclosure. As weka diet consists of mostly invertebrates and fruits, weka will exert pressure on leaf litter invertebrates. They will also take lizards, snails, rodents and the eggs, young and adults of ground nesting birds. For this reason, populations of lizards, tuatara, banded rail, spotless crake and Cook s petrels are likely to be impacted by weka. Weka may also need to be excluded from wood rose sites and bat roost sites (T. Beauchamp pers. comm.). In the past, weka would have co-existed with these species, but in a small confined area (which is what Maungatuatari is compared to the entire North Island available in the past), the impacts of weka may be greater due to limited refuges for other species. In addition, the natural predators of weka are now extinct, preventing any natural limitations to their population numbers. Some species proposed for introduction on Maungatautari e.g. Chatham Island snipe evolved in the absence of weka and so may not have any defence mechanisms. Weka have also been known to prey significantly on adult mottled petrels (a very similar species to Cook s petrels) on Codfish Island (C. Smuts- Kennedy pers comm.). For these reasons, management of other restoration projects (e.g. Karori) has involved the confinement of weka to one area. Weka should also be confined to an area of Maungatautari where they will not impact other populations trying to establish and where their effects on populations can be assessed. Past releases of weka have involved releasing wild captured weka in cages and then releasing in a new site. However, they invariably move back towards their former territories following release. This can be avoided by containing weka in an aviary for some time at the new site and by moving juveniles (old enough to be independent from their parents, but not be attached to a breeding site) (Graeme and Graeme 1994). Weka are very susceptible to poisoning by Broadifacoum (Beauchamp et al. 1999) and thus should not be released if poison drops are still necessary on the mountain. Working Document last revision September

73 Takahe From fossil distribution, it can be interpreted that takahe was widespread in lowland forest and probably inhabited forest margins at all altitudes (Worthy and Holdaway 1993), however the only original surviving population is a single relict population of about 120 takahae in the Murchison Mountains of Fiordland (Jamieson and Ryan 1999). Takahae have been translocated from this population to a number of predatorfree offshore islands to safeguard the survival of this species. When transferred to lowland forest type islands, such as Mana, Kapati, Maud and Tiritiri-Matangi Islands, survival has been high, but breeding has not been as successful as expected due to high egg infertility (Jamieson and Ryan 1999). The low fertility of translocated birds could be due to a lack of genetic variation in the population which means that the population is not able to readily adapt to changes in the environment. On Tiritiri Matangi, takahe are fed a special takahe food every day, but this has not helped with breeding success. Translocation of takahe to Maungatautari is likely to be delayed by the availability of birds. Kiwi Brown kiwi and little spotted kiwi may have lived in the North Island in the past (Worthy and Holdaway 1993). All species of kiwi are currently classified as threatened, and the main cause of their decline has been predation by stoats in particular, but also dogs and ferrets. Reintroduction to Maungatautari will provide a predator free environment where kiwi chicks can be raised, increasing population numbers. There is currently an active programme of translocation of kiwi and through Operation Nest Egg, young chicks which require a predator free home. The two enclosures will be too small to support a viable kiwi population (Basse and McLennan 2003), and may be best suited to being used as a nursery with which to seed the rest of the mountain once predator control has taken place. Over the entire mountain, it is estimated that a population of at least 1500 brown kiwi could be achieved and up to 3000 if little spotted kiwi are introduced as well (J. McLennan pers. comm.). Brown kiwi should be of one regional genotype and there will need to be some debate over which genotype is most suitable for release here. Kakapo Kakapo were widespread in all three main islands before human settlement (Worthy and Holdaway 1993). Release of kakapo in Maungatautari will depend on the expansion of existing populations. Breeding success is showing promising signs of increasing the population, but the population is still precariously low. However, once the population increases in the future, there will be a serious need for large pest free sites where self sustaining populations can be maintained. A population of more than 100 birds is considered self sustaining ( The large size of Maungatautari should support a population of at least 150 birds. By the time populations of kakapo are high enough to require new habitat, Maungatautari should have had a proven pest free record for a number of years and may well be picked as the most suitable kakapo home. Working Document last revision September

74 Kokako Kokako are endangered birds, with only 400 pairs left in the wild, in small, isolated populations (Innes and Flux 1999). The main cause of kokako decline has been predation by ship rats and possums (Innes and Flux 1999). Kokako defend 4-20ha territories, in which they obtain all of their resources (Innes and Flux 1999). Kokako have been successfully transferred to a number of pest-free offshore islands and captive breeding of kokako is also successful. A kokako population should establish successfully at Maungatautari once it is pest free. Saddlebacks Saddlebacks were one of the first native birds to be successfully translocated in the 1960 s (Merton 1965) and thus there is a long history of translocation methods. Saddlebacks have successfully been translocated to Tiritiri Matangi and Mokoia Islands. Mokoia Island (in Lake Rotorua) is currently the only inland wild population of saddlebacks and introduction to Maungatautari will allow inland populations to be increased. Research by (Armstrong et al. 1994) has shown that familiarity among released birds is not necessary for a successful translocation, meaning that birds for translocation can be selected on genetic criteria. Saddlebacks are sensitive to poisoning and should not be introduced until there is a low chance of needing additional poison drops at Maungatautari. They are also very efficient invertebrate predators and may significantly alter the abundance of their prey. The effect of saddlebacks on invertebrates needs to be considered where threatened invertebrates exist. Robins Robins have been successfully translocated to the Karori Wildlife Sanctuary and many other locations around New Zealand and are now breeding successfully, with high release survival and rapid breeding after release. Hihi (Stitchbird) There have been a number of translocations of hihi (Mokoia, Kapati and Tiritiri Matangi Islands) all requiring ongoing support and intervention. These translocations have shown that hihi either breed better with or in some cases actually require supplementary feeding from feeding stations designed to exclude larger competitors such as tui. Hihi are also very prone to respiratory infections and may require artificial nest boxes managed to reduce the spread of the parasitic mite which causes these. Castro et al. (1994a) have shown that hihi should be released as soon as possible after transfer to reduce stress, and preferably be released into areas where resident hihi are not present. They should be provided with supplementary food at feeding stations designed to exclude larger competitors (tui). Stress in captivity can be alleviated by caging birds in groups rather than pairs, not releasing where resident hihi are present and by keeping them in captivity for as short a time as possible (hihi are particularly prone to respiratory diseases in captivity) (Castro et al. 1994a). Hihi are subordinate to tui and bellbird. Hihi requirement for nesting cavities is likely to be met in a mature forest such as Maungatautari (breeding success on Kapati Island was limited by competition for nest sites) (Castro et al. 1994b). A visual assessment of suitable nest cavities for hihi must be undertaken before release. Working Document last revision September

75 Kakariki Both red and yellow crowned parakeets (kakariki) would have existed on the mountain in the past, with yellows tending to live at higher altitudes to reds. Redcrowned Parakeets have been successfully translocated to a number of locations including Mt Bruce and Tirittiri Matangi, however less translocations have been carried out for yellow (McHalick 1998). Yellows are slightly smaller than reds and may be more difficult to establish, so consideration should be given to introducing them before reds. Both have been bred successfully in captivity. A survey of suitable nest cavities should be undertaken before release. Longtailed cuckoo Longtailed cuckoo will probably establish naturally once there is a sufficient whitehead population. Whiteheads (unknowingly) act as surrogate mothers by raising the cuckoo chicks instead of their own. Whitehead In 2002, it was possible that a small whitehead population still existed on Maungatautari, although it was noted that its situation was precarious and no birds were heard (Innes et al. 2002). Anecdotal evidence suggests that this population has now gone from the mountain. Surveys will need to be carried out to determine if whitehead do still exist here. It may be appropriate to introduce whitehead to the mountain if none can be found. Whitehead have been successfully established on Tiritiri Matangi Island. Rifleman Rifleman have not been successfully translocated before which provides an additional challenge to establishing this bird on Maungatautari. Currently, Dunedin Forest and Bird has gained approval to translocate South Island rifleman, which, if successful, could provide valuable information to Maungatautari (contact [email protected]). This is also one of the few cases in which a non-government organisation has been authorised to carry out a translocation and this will also provide valuable information. Kaka It is possible that kaka will establish naturally on Maungatautari after pest control has been achieved, as there are populations within visiting distance. However if a population does not establish after a reasonable period, it may be appropriate to translocate a population here. A kaka population at Mount Bruce has been successfully established by translocation of wild-caught kaka and release of captive reared birds (Berry 1998). Comprehensive information on successful translocation and release methods for kaka are detailed in Berry (1998). Cooks and Black Petrel Petrels are strongly philopatric which means their home imprint is strong. Almost all adult birds that have been moved have returned to their natal colony. The only way to avoid this is to move pre-fledging chicks as even fledging chicks are imprinted. To move pre-fledging chicks requires a large commitment and effort in feeding and care. Establishing petrels will not only require a large commitment in establishment, but a long time frame, as after fledging, birds go to sea for two to six years (depending on the species) before coming home for a season or two before mating begins. Thus it could take at least two years before it is known whether establishment of the colony Working Document last revision September

76 has been successful and birds will return here rather than their original colony. It could take at least four years before it is known if a breeding population has been successfully established. Despite these hurdles, seabird colonies have been successfully translocated. Bell (1994) experimented on the common fluttering shearwater to establish best techniques for successful seabird translocations. If successful, it was hoped that the results of this study could be applied to endangered birds. It was found that birds needed to be moved at a very young age (well before fledging) and transferred to artificial burrows at their new location. Any birds translocated near fledging age went missing from their burrows, presumably to return to the original colony. Because the birds were so young, they needed to be removed from their burrows for feeding twice daily. Adult bird calls were played during feeding to give the impression of a larger colony. Birds were fed a formula of fish (juvenile salmon), water, golden syrup, muttonbird oil, corn oil and vitamin B1, which required extensive preparation. This trial colony has been successful in that some of the handreared chicks have returned to breed after five to six years at sea. The same transfer principles have been applied to Pycrofts petrel (Bull 2003), but it will be some time before the success is known. Bush Wrens Bush wrens used to be present throughout the forest of the North, South and Stewart Islands, but are now extinct. The last remaining Xenicus wren species in New Zealand is the rock wren living in the high country of the South Island. Translocation of rock wren might be worth considering as a surrogate (or analogue) species for bush wren (see section ). Little is known about the rock wren, although its population is nationally vulnerable (Hitchmough 2002). Research is required to see if a population of rock wren will adapt to a northern lowland bush habitat. The rocky outcrops of Maungatautari may be a suitable habitat if the wrens can survive with the other species proposed for introduction there (e.g. tuatara and petrels). Research into habitat requirements, interactions with other species and food requirements are urgently required. Chatham Island Snipe Chatham Island snipe are now found in only 1% of their former range and the population is estimated to be pairs. The management plan for Chatham Island snipe (Anon 2001) recommends trial translocations of birds to other pest-free sites to learn the most successful translocation techniques for snipe which can then be applied to the much rarer Campbell Island snipe, and also to safeguard the Chatham Island population against catastrophic events that could wipe out the entire population. This will require negotiation with the Chatham Island people to achieve. Invertebrates Introductions of invertebrates need to occur either before any predators are introduced, or in spaces where predation is unlikely to occur. A full assessment of the invertebrate fauna of Maungatautari is required to determine what species are missing. Working Document last revision September

77 Mahoenui weta are thought to have lived in tawa forest in pre-european times and are likely to do best on the lower slopes of Maungatautari (McGuinness 1998). Successful Mahoenui weta translocations have been made in the King country from their site of origin to two other reserves. Weta were captured and placed in containers and released within 12-24hrs of capture (Sherley 1994). Two releases of around 100 individuals (roughly equal male and female ratios) were carried out approximately ten months apart. New individuals have been found in subsequent years indicating that a breeding population has successfully established following translocation. Middle Island tusked weta have been bred in captivity by Landcare Research. A batch of hatchlings for release requires a years work and costs around $10,000. Reptiles Current taxonomy recognises two species of tuatara, Sphenodon punctatus and Sphenodon guntheri. S. guntheri is found naturally on only one island in the Marlbourgh Sounds. S. punctatus is comprised of two subspecies: S. punctatus punctatus or northern tuatara and an unnamed subspecies or Cook Strait tuatara (Gaze 2001). Northern tuatara occurred from the Bay of Plenty North (Gaze 2001) and may require higher temperatures for successful egg incubation than occur on Maungatautari. For this reason, the Cook Strait tuatara may be the most suitable for introduction to Maungatautari, however this will require input from the tuatara recovery group. The success of tuatara establishment is best when introductions are carried out where burrowing birds are present (Gaze 2001). For this reason, petrel species should ideally be introduced to the rocky outcrops of Maungatautari before the introduction of tuatara. When burrows and open nesting habitat are available, tuatara breeding success is higher (Gaze 2001). Experience from introductions of tuatara on offshore islands suggests that where habitat is poor, tuatara will disperse and breeding will be compromised simply because they do not meet again to mate. However, if tuatara are introduced to high quality habitat, such as a petrel colony, they are more likely to stay in the one area and breed. Tuatara have been successfully translocated to a number of off-shore islands and there are also active captive rearing programmes. Tuatara have recently been translocated to Tiritiri Matangi Island and research into their behaviour after translocation should help with the establishment of tuatara at Maungatautari. Skinks that would have been present on Maungatautari in the past include: Cylodina aenea and C. ornata which are possibly still present: C. alani, C. macgregori, and C. whitakeri which currently only occur on rat free islands. Oligosoma striatum are possibly still present in epiphytes in trees, but this requires conformation. O. infrapunctatum is possibly present in open areas such as the rocky outcrops. O. homalototum may also be a suitable candidate for reintroduction (Towns et al. 2002). Working Document last revision September

78 Geckos probably present on Maungatautari include green gecko, forest gecko and pacific gecko. Common gecko and striped gecko may also be present. Duvaucel s gecko is now only present on rat free islands, but is in the subfossil record for this area. Successful translocation of skinks (Leiolopisma species) has been carried out in Fiordland where the Fiordland skink was successfully transferred to a neighbouring island. 20 males and 20 females from a number of distinct areas in the source population were captured and then released on the source island. One year later, the population was breeding, and in less than five years the population had increased by more than 400% and skinks were beginning to naturally disperse away from the original release site (Thomas and Whitaker 1994). This example suggests that translocation of some skinks can be carried out successfully. Whitaker s skink (Cyclodina species) has also been translocated to other islands, although population expansion rates have only been 5-9% per annum. This appears to be due to the low annual reproductive output of one offspring per female, meaning an estimated life-time productivity of only 16 offspring (Towns et al. 2001). Nine years of monitoring on Korapuki Island was required to provide robust evidence that the translocated population was expanding (Towns et al. 2001). A prediction of population increases suggested that Whitakers skinks could take up to 70 years to reach a modest density of 650/ha on Korapuki Island, and this prediction does not include predation, density-dependent effects or competitive effects from related species (Towns et al. 2001). With other biotic and abiotic influences factored into the equation, tuatara and some lizard translocations may take centuries and possibly millennia to reach carrying capacity (Towns et al. 2001). Introductions of reptiles will require a long time commitment. Female tuatara may take up to four years to produce a clutch of eggs (Towns et al. 2001). New Zealand reptiles tend to have low reproductivity and long life spans: These characteristics need to be considered in the design of reintroduction attempts because of extended periods where the new populations are at risk of failure, as well as the long periods required before success can be determined (Towns et al. 2001). However, there is promising research into captive breeding these species and giving the population a head start (Smuts-Kennedy pers. comm.). Frogs Until surveying for existing frog populations is carried out, no recommendations for frog introductions can be made. Leiopelma hamiltoni is currently confined to rat-free islands and could be a candidate for reintroduction. Hochsetter s frog and Archey s frog still exist on the mainland (Worthy 1987) and could be reintroduced to Maungatautari if they do not already exist here and if suitable habitat exists. Before introduction of Archey s and Hochstetter frogs, the climate needs to be monitored for several years to ensure the habitat is suitable. Surveys also need to determine that no native frog populations already exist here. Working Document last revision September

79 Fish Banded and short-jawed kokopu would have been present in the streams of Maungatautari. However any reintroduction is unlikely to succeed due to the migratory nature of these species and the lack of suitable passage between the mountain and sea. Working Document last revision September

80 Appendix 6: Bibliography of Translocation Publications By D. P. Armstrong, Massey University, New Zealand This list below includes publications on New Zealand translocations done for conservation purposes. It includes general articles discussing New Zealand situations or focusing on New Zealand examples, as well as case studies on particular translocations. It includes any research targeted at improving translocation strategies, but not necessarily any research that uses a translocated population. It does not include cases involving rehabilitation or relocation of common species. I excluded publications that report translocations, but not in enough detail to be useful to another practitioner, and excluded publications on planned reintroductions unless they addressed issues of widespread interest. I also excluded publications that seemed to be superseded by more recent publications. I have not currently included unpublished reports or in-house publications, but these could be included if information is given on how to obtain them. If you know of other publications or reports that should be included on the list, please contact [email protected]. Books Butler, D., & Merton, M. (1992). The black robin: saving the world's most endangered bird. Auckland: Oxford University Press. Serena, M., Ed. (1995). Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton.: Surrey Beatty & Sons. Articles in Journals or Books Aikman, H. (1999). Attempts to establish shore plover (Thinornis novaeseelandiae) on Mouora Island, Hauraki Gulf. Notornis 46: Angehr, G. R. (1984). Establishment of the stitchbird on Hen Island. Notornis, 31, Armstrong, D. P., & McLean, I. G. (1995). New Zealand translocations: theory and practice. Pacific Conservation Biology, 2, Armstrong, D. P., Soderquist, T., & Southgate, R. (1995). Designing experimental reintroductions as experiments. In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton.: Surrey Beatty & Sons. Armstrong, D. P., Lovegrove, T. G., Allen, D. G., & Craig, J. L. (1995). Composition of founder groups for bird translocations: does familiarity matter? In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty & Sons. Working Document last revision September

81 Armstrong, D. P., & Craig, J. L. (1995). Effects of familiarity on the outcome of translocations. I. A test using saddlebacks. Biological Conservation, 71, Armstrong, D. P. (1995). Effects of familiarity on the outcome of translocations. II. A test using New Zealand robins. Biological Conservation, 71, Armstrong D.P., Castro I., Alley J., Feenstra B. and Perrott J.K. (1999). Mortality and behaviour of hihi, an endangered New Zealand honeyeater, in the establishment phase following translocation. Biological Conservation 89: Armstrong, D.P. and Perrott, J.K. (2000). An experiment testing whether condition and survival are limited by food supply in a translocated hihi population. Conservation Biology 14: Armstrong, D.P., and Ewen, J.G. (2001). Assessing the value of follow-up translocations: a case study using New Zealand robins. Biological Conservation 101: Bell, B. D. (1994). A review of the status of New Zealand Leiopelma species (Anura: Leiopelmatidae), including a summary of demographic studies in Coromandel and on Maud Island. New Zealand Journal of Zoology 21: Bell, B. D. (1995). Translocation of fluttering shearwaters: developing a method to reestablish seabird populations. In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty. Beauchamp, A.J., Staples, G.C., Staples, E.D., Graeme, A., Grame, B. & Fox, E. (2000). Failed establishment of North Island weka (Gallirallus australis greyi) at Karangahake Gorge, North Island, New Zealand. Notornis 47: Bramley, G. N., & Veltman, C. J. (1998). Failure of translocated, captive-bred North Island weka Gallirallus australis greyi to establish a new population. Bird Conservation International 8: Brown, D. (1994). Transfer of Hamilton's frog, Leiopelma hamiltoni, to a newly created habitat on Stephens Island, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Zoology, 21, Castro, I., Alley, J., Empson, R.A., & Minot, E. O. (1995a). Translocation of hihi or stitchbird (Notiomystis cincta) to Kapiti Island, New Zealand: transfer techniques and comparison of release strategies. In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty. Castro, I., Minot, E. O., & Alley, J. C. (1995b). Feeding and breeding behaviour of hihi (stichbirds, Notiomystis cincta) recently transferred to Kapiti Island, New Zealand, and possible management alternatives. In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty. Working Document last revision September

82 Clout, M.N., & Merton, D.V. (1998). Saving the kakapo: the conservation of the world's most peculiar parrot. Bird Conservation International. 8: Colbourne, R. M., & Robertson, H. A. (1997). Successful translocations of little spotted kiwi (Apteryx owenii) between islands of New Zealand. Notornis, 44, Craig, J. L., & Douglas, M. E. (1984). Bellbirds in Auckland and Northland. Notornis, 31, Craig, J. L., & Veitch, C. R. (1990). Transfer of organisms to islands. In D. R. Towns, C. H. Daugherty, & I. A. E. Atkinson (Eds.), Ecological restoration of New Zealand islands (pp ). Wellington, New Zealand: Conservation Sciences Publication No 2. Flack, J. D. (1978). Interisland transfers of New Zealand black robins. In S. A. Temple (Eds.), Endangered birds: management techniques for preserving threatened species (pp ). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Galbraith, M. P., & Hayson, C. R. (1995). Tiritiri Matangi Island, New Zealand: public participation in species translocation to an open sanctuary. In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty & Sons. Graeme, A., & Graeme, B. (1995). Against the odds: captive rearing and population restoration of North Island weka Gallirallus australis greyi by a non-government organization. In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty & Sons. Hayes, F. N., & Williams, M. (1982). The status, aviculture and re-establishment of brown teal in New Zealand. Wildfowl, 33, Hutchinson, W. (1998). An attempt to establish a new, viable population of blue duck (Hymenolaimus malacorhynchos) in Egmont National Park. Ecological Management, 6, Jamieson, I.G. & Ryan, C.J. (2000). Increased egg infertility associated with translocating inbred takahe (Porphyrio hockstetteri) to island refuges in New Zealand. Biological Conservation 94: Jansen, W. P. (1993). Introduction of North Island robins to Mokoia Island, Lake Rotorua, and public involvement. Ecological Management, 1, Jolly, J. N., & Colbourne, R. M. (1991). Translocation of the little spotted kiwi (Apteryx owenii) between offshore islands of New Zealand. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 21, Lloyd, B. D., & Powlesland, R. G. (1994). The decline of kakapo Strigops habroptilus and attempts at conservation by translocation. Biological Conservation, 69, Working Document last revision September

83 Lovegrove, T. G. (1996). Island releases of saddlebacks Philesturnus carunculatus in New Zealand. Biological Conservation, 77, Lovegrove, T. G., & Veitch, C. R. (1994). Translocating wild forest birds. Ecological Management, 2, MacMillan, B.W.H. (1990). Attempts to re-establish wekas, brown kiwis and redcrowned parakeets in the Waitakere ranges. Notornis 37, Meads, M. J. (1995). Translocation of New Zealand's endangered insects as a tool for conservation. In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty. Merton, D.V. (1965). Transfer of Saddleback from Hen Island to Middle Chicken Island, January Notornis 12: Merton, D.V. (1975). The Saddleback: its status and conservation. In R.D. Martin (Ed.).Breeding endangered species in captivity: pp Academic Press, London. Merton, D.V. (1993). The Chatham Island Black robin. Bird World (USA) 15: Owen, K. (1998a). Removal and reintroduction of North Island weka (Gallirallus australis greyi) to Mokoia Island as a result of a Talon 7120 cereal-based aerial poison drop. Ecological Management, 6, Owen, K. (1998b). Introduction of northern tuatara to Moutohora Island, Bay of Plenty. Ecological Management, 6, Owen, K.L., Blick, A. (2000). Iwi initiated introduction of tieke to Moutohora (Whale Island)Ecological Management 8: Parrish, R., & Anderson,?. (1999). Lizard transfers from Matapia Island to Motuopao Island, Northland, New Zealand and observations on other fauna present. Tane 37, in press. Pierce, R. J. (1994). Survey of North Island robins on Moturua Island, Bay of Islands. Notornis, 41, Pierre, J.P. (1999). Reintroduction of the South Island saddleback (Philesturnus caranculatus carunculatus): Dispersal, social organisation and survival. Biological Conservation 89: Pierre, J.P. (2000). Foraging behaviour and diet of a reintroduced population of the South Island saddleback (Philesturnus caranculatus carunculatus). Notornis 47: Powlesland, R. G., & Lloyd, B. D. (1994). Use of supplementary feeding to induce breeding in free-living kakapo Strigops habroptilus in New Zealand. Biological Conservation, 69, Working Document last revision September

84 Powlesland, R. G., & Williams, M. (1997). "Hard release" of captive-reared New Zealand pigeons (Hemiphaga n. novaeseelandiae). Notornis, 44, Preece, J., & Shaw, T. (1998). An attempt to transfer weka from the Chetwode Islands, Marlborough Sounds, to The Glen, Nelson. Ecological Management, 6, Rasch, G., & McClelland, P. (1993). South Island saddlebacks transferred to Breaksea Island. Notornis, 40, Reed, C., & Merton, D. (1991). Behavioral manipulation of endangered New Zealand birds as an aid toward species recovery. In Acta XX Congressus Internationalis Ornithologici, (pp ). Reed, C. E. M., Nilsson, R. J., & Murray, D. P. (1993). Cross-fostering on New Zealand's black stilt. Journal of Wildlife Management, 57, Reed, C., & Stockdale, P. H. G. (1994). Disease considerations in captive breeding and translocation of New Zealand birds. Ecological Management, 2,??-?? Robertson, D. B. (1976). Weka liberation in Northland. Notornis, 23, Saunders, A. J. (1995). Translocations in New Zealand: an overview. In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty & Sons. Sherley, G. (1995). Translocations of Mahoenui giant weta (Deinacrida n. sp.) and Placostylus flax snails in New Zealand: what have we learnt. In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty. Thomas, B. W., & Whitaker, A. H. (1995). Translocation of the fiordland skink Leiolopisma acrinasum to Hawea Island, Breaksea Sound, Fiordland. In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty & Sons. Towns, D. R. (1994). The role of ecological restoration in the conservation of Whitaker's skink (Cyclodina whitakeri), a rare New Zealand lizard (Lacertilia: Scincidae). New Zealand Journal of Ecology, 21, Towns, D. R., Daugherty, C. H., & Cromarty, P. L. (1990). Protocols for translocation of organisms to islands. In D. R. Towns, C. H. Daugherty, & I. A. E. Atkinson (Eds.), Ecological restoration of New Zealand islands Wellington, New Zealand: Conservation Sciences Publication No 2. Towns, D.R., & Ferreira, S.M. (2001). Conservation of New Zealand lizards (Lacertilia:Scincidae)by translocation of small populations. Biological Conservation 98 (2001) Working Document last revision September

85 Veitch, C. R. (1995). Habitat repair: a necessary pre-requisite to translocation of threatened birds in New Zealand. In M. Serena (Ed.), Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp ). Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty. Williams, G. R. (1977). Marooning -- a technique for saving threatened species from extinction. International Zoo Yearbook, 17, Notes in Reintroduction News Armstrong, D. (1995). Effects of familiarity in bird translocations, New Zealand. Reintroduction News 10: 9. Armstrong, D. (1998). Comments on reintroduction by Australasia/Marsupial section chair. Reintroduction News 15: Armstrong, D. (2000). Re-introductions of New Zealand robins: a key component of ecological restoration. Reintroduction News 19: Armstrong, D. & Perrott, J. (1995). Testing for food limitation following translocation, New Zealand. Reintroduction News 10: 9. Boyd, S. & Castro, I. (2000). Translocation history of hihi (stitchbird), an endemic New Zealand honeyeater. Reintroduction News 19: Colbourne, R. & Robertson, H. (2000). The history of translocations and reintroductions of kiwi in New Zealand. Reintroduction News 19: Gaze, P. (1999). Translocation of the Maud Island frog in the Marlborough Sounds, New Zealand. Reintroduction News 17: Jamieson, I., Lee, W. & Maxwell, J. (2000). Fifty years of conservation management and re-introductions of the takahe in New Zealand. Reintroduction News 19: Maloney, R. & Murray, D. (2000). Summary of kaki (black stilt) releases in New Zealand. Reintroduction News 19: McClelland, P. (2000). Re-introduction of the Campbell Island teal, New Zealand. Reintroduction News 19: O'Connor, S. (2000). Re-introducing shore plover to "Mainland" New Zealand. Reintroduction News 19: Owen, K. (1999). Reintroduction of northern tuatara to Moutohora Island, Bay of Plenty, New Zealand. Reintroduction News 17: Reed, C. (1995). Release of captive-reared stilts into the wild, New Zealand. Reintroduction News 11: 5-6. Sherley, G. (1995). Invertebrate reintroduction in New Zealand. Reintroduction News 10: 8-9. Working Document last revision September

86 Towns, D. (1995). Reintroduction of Whitaker's skink for island restoration in New Zealand. Reintroduction News 11: 3-4. Towns, D. (1999). Reintroduction strategies for New Zealand skinks. Reintroduction News 17: Theses Berry, R. J. (1998) Reintroducing juvenile kaka to Mount Bruce reserve. MSc thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North Castro, I. (1995) Behavioural ecology and management of hihi (Notiomystis cincta), an endemic New Zealand honeyeater. PhD thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North [general study of hihi on Kapiti Island with aim of understanding population decline] Davidson, R.S. (1999). Population dynamics of saddlebacks on Mokoia Island, and implications for reintroduction to the mainland. MSc thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North. Ewen, J. G. (1998) A genetic and behavioural investigation of extra-pair copulation in stitchbirds (Notiomystis cincta) breeding on Tiritiri Matangi Island. MSc thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North [conducted in first two breeding seasons after reintroduction, and includes chapter on management techniques for the population] Flannagan, H.J. (2000). Conservation biology of the goldstripe gecko (Hoplodactylus chrysosireticus) and interactions with Duvaucel's gecko (Hoplodactylus duvaucelii) on Mana Island, Cook Strait, New Zealand. MSc thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North. [includes cage trials assessing possible impact of reintroduced Duvaucel's on goldstripes] Gray, R.S. (1977). The kakapo (Strigops habroptilus, Gray 1847), its food, feeding and habitat in Fiordland and Maud Island. MSc thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North. Griffiths, R. (1999). The translocation and establishment of spotted skink (Oligosoma lineoocellatum) from Matiu-Somes Island to Mana Island. M.Con.Sc. thesis, University of Victoria, Wellington [data on abundance, movements, and weights of spotted skinks for first few months after translocation, plus other species of skinks at source and release sites]. Hume, D. K. (1995) Anti-predator training: an experimental approach in reintroduction biology. MSc thesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch. Nelson, N. (1998). Conservation of Brother's Island tuatara (Sphenodon guntheri). M. Con. Sci. Victoria University, Wellington Perrott, J. K. (1997) Testing the effect of food supply and competition on the outcome of the hihi (Notiomystis cincta) translocation to Mokoia Island. MSc thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North. Working Document last revision September

87 Pierre, J. P. (1995) Behaviour, ecology and reintroduction biology of the South Island saddleback Philesturnus caranculatus carunculatus. BSc Honours thesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch. Raeburn, E.H. (2001) Reintroduction of North Island robins to Paengaroa Scenic Reserve: factors limiting survival, nest success and population viability in a mainland resotration area. MSc thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North. Ussher, G.T Restoration of threatened species populations: tuatara rehabilitations and reintroductions. PhD thesis, University of Auckland. Wilson, L. R. (1997) The ecology and management of honeyeaters in northern New Zealand. MSc thesis, University of Auckland, Auckland [focuses on newly-released stitchbird population on Tiritiri Matangi and its interactions with other honeyeaters] Working Document last revision September

88 Part 3. Monitoring and risk assessment Monitoring the progress of a restoration, sometimes a neglected activity is essential. Without it there is little capacity to detect mistakes or other problems and opportunities to take corrective action may be lost. Success can be measured by the extent to which targeted species, including those threatened, become self-maintaining in the restored area (Atkinson 2001). Giant Weta (Photo B.D. Clarkson) Working Document last revision September

89 Table of Contents Part 3. Monitoring and risk assessment Monitoring and research needs Vegetation monitoring Bird monitoring Bat monitoring Mammalian pest monitoring Invertebrate monitoring Reptile and amphibian monitoring Water quality monitoring Key species monitoring Continuing protection for Maungatautari Mammalian pests Weeds Invertebrate pests People (visitors, field workers, and researchers) Connections with the surrounding landscape Risks to the restoration of Maungatautari and amelioration of the risks Appendix 7: Common and scientific names used.. 97 Appendix 8: Application to conduct scientific research on Maungatautari Working Document last revision September

90 TP PT (adapted PT 1. Monitoring and Research NeedsTP Failure to monitor steps and rates of progress in a restoration programme may result in loss of significant information that could avoid further mistakes or enable successful programmes to be repeated (Atkinson 1996). Before any fence building begins, it is desirable to collect information on as many species as possible prior to vegetation clearance and pest removal. This information is important to collect so that any positive or negative effects on the species resulting from pest removal can be measured. Monitoring the progress of a restoration, sometimes a neglected activity is essential. Without it there is little capacity to detect mistakes or other problems and opportunities to take corrective action may be lost. Success can be measured by the extent to which targeted species, including those threatened, become self-maintaining in the restored area (Atkinson 2001). It is also desirable to fully describe the biodiversity of Maungatautari as it is not uniformly distributed across the landscape. A broad classification and description of the reserve area into communities/ecosystems/management units of similar biotic composition as a management framework is necessary. The vegetation map by McKelvey (1963) and Nicholls (1963) is a starting point for this classification. Other biodiversity databases need to be searched for records of species and their locations previously identified from Maungatautari. On-going monitoring of the mountain is necessary for the following reasons: To audit the efficacy of ongoing pest exclusion To detect biological changes arising from pest removal To provide regular and rapid (following pest eradication) feedback to stakeholders, funding agencies and the local community on the changes/improvements occurring To detect the impact of increased human visitation on the ecology of the mountain To improve scientific knowledge of ecosystem change in the absence of pests - this would most desirably be at all levels of biological science from soil science through to vertebrate ecology. Monitoring ideally should be carried out for at least three years prior to pest eradication to reduce the risks of monitoring being carried out in an atypical year (e.g. extreme weather conditions). The two cell plan of pest removal will provide an opportunity to monitor pest free areas while also monitoring outside the cells where no pest removal is carried out. It is recommended that no pest removal be done outside the cells until at least three years data are collected to provide a good base line with which to assess the success of the pest proof fence. Once the entire mountain is 7 7 from Bruce Burns in MacGibbon (2001)) Working Document last revision September

91 predator free, Mt. Pirongia, with low levels of pest control, will be suitable as a reference site. It is vital to the success of this project that baseline data are obtained to show the effects of the pest proof fence. Monitoring programmes need to have sufficient power to detect significant changes in abundance so that the risk of not detecting a change in a population when one actually exists is minimised. At its extreme, this will prevent a population heading towards extinction from not being detected. Monitoring programmes thus need to depend on interactions between sample size, duration, frequency of surveys and the ability to control variability in counts because of other factors such as weather (O'Donnell and Langton 2003). For most programmes, sufficient power can be achieved by large sample sizes and many years of monitoring (O'Donnell and Langton 2003). Extensive surveys are also required in the short term to determine exactly what species are present on Maungatautari before any reintroductions begin. This will ensure the genetic stock of any species that have the potential to expand their range after pest removal is not contaminated in any way by non-local stock Vegetation monitoring Key plant species that will be useful indicators of forest health improvement are species that are highly palatable to browsing animals, such as mistletoe, titoki, rata, fuchsia, fivefinger and kamahi. Long-term monitoring of forest composition and structure can be achieved with 20m x 20m permanent plots (Allen 1993). These plots have been used for assessing longterm forest condition and mortality patterns, changes in seedling regeneration, biodiversity and exotic weed invasion. This method quantifies information on seedling, sapling and tree densities and measures the basal areas of trees. This method has been widely used around New Zealand, with more than 10,000 such plots already established (Allen 1993), but there are none currently on Maungatautari. Mt. Pirongia already has 20 of these plots, which will be useful in providing reference plots for those on Maungatautari. The number of permanent plots on Maungatautari should be minimum enough to give replication in each major forest ecosystem type identified. Plots are typically remeasured at 5-10 year intervals which is a minimum period suitable for revealing significant change within tall forest vegetation. These plots are thus an investment in long-term monitoring and will not provide short-term results which might be desirable in the first few years of the project. Another widely used method for describing forest vegetation is the RECCE method of (Allen 1992) in conjunction with 20 x 20m plots to provide a species list and forest typing information. This is designed as a one off survey method and has limited use in monitoring changes over time. In this method, plant species presence and cover in a series of vertical tiers on plots of homogenous vegetation type are described, along with site characteristics such as altitude, aspect, substrate etc which are not covered by the 20 x 20m plot method. Birds and other biota are also recorded. About 96 RECCE plots should be placed on the mountain to cover the full range of environmental variation i.e. to sample different combinations of altitude, aspect and Working Document last revision September

92 topographic position (ridge versus gully). These will provide valuable background information on biodiversity before pest eradication begins. Initially, vegetation monitoring (permanent plots and RECCE) will focus on comparisons between pest-present and pest-free areas by comparing vegetation within the two enclosures to similar vegetation types outside the enclosures. Twenty permanent plots will be established for this purpose in March 2004 prior to any pest control activities and vegetation will be recorded by experienced ecologists. Eventually, it will be desirable to increase the number of permanent plots over the mountain to take into account a range of vegetation types. Permanent plots already established on Mt. Pirongia will then provide a suitable pest-present control when the entire mountain is deemed pest-free. A useful method of measuring changes in vegetation canopy condition is by a subjective visual assessment of foliar browse index (FBI). A visual assessment of foliage density of a sample of individual trees is a common rapid method of determining forest health (Frampton et al. 2001), often used in New Zealand to monitor possum damage to tree canopies. However, changes in foliage cover can vary significantly between years from damage inflicted solely by environmental factors other than possum impacts (as seen on trees monitored on possum-free Little Barrier Island (Perfect 2000). FBI provides the clearest results of forest canopy recovery from possum damage in areas with high possum densities that are then subject to possum control. It is not effective in determining improvements in areas where possum densities are already low such as at Maungatautari. It is unlikely that this method will detect changes in possum impacts following fencing on the basis that canopies are already in reasonably good health. An FBI system will be useful to monitor general forest canopy health. The method is now widely used by Department of Conservation monitoring teams throughout New Zealand, so results would be comparable with other areas. It is also a rapid and low cost method, with monitoring probably already occurring in suitable reference areas. Additional information is also often collected about the trees sampled including extent of flowering and fruiting, presence of possum trunk use and tree mortality. FBI requires assessing canopy density of a sample of individual trees of particular species along marked transects. Usually the species chosen are those preferred by possums as food trees. About fifty trees of each species are required to detect changes of around 10% in estimated foliage cover between measurements. Typically, trees are remeasured every 1-3 years in the same season each time. Flowering and seed production can also be useful indicators of overall plant and forest health in terms of the vigour of the plants themselves, the amount of potential plant regeneration available, and the food available for consumption by animals. Monitoring can be carried out using subjective visual assessments over time of the amount of flowers or fruit/seeds on marked trees. This is often done in conjunction with FBI monitoring. Alternatively, seed traps can be deployed in the forest for set lengths of time and contents analysed for amount and diversity of seedfall between different sampling periods. This technique can be quite labour intensive and costly due to the time needed to sort through traps. Care must be taken when monitoring Working Document last revision September

93 flower and seed production in New Zealand forests as natural production of flowers and fruits is often subject to a masting cycle, where years of abundant production are naturally followed by years of low levels of fruiting. Care needs to be exercised in attributing management effects to changes in flower and seed production of some species that may be simply attributable to the biology of the species. All monitoring methods which hope to establish trends over time due to pest control must be employed prior to any pest control to establish a baseline condition for comparison. In addition to the monitoring methods described above, thorough searches for rare or uncommon species must be carried out before introductions are made Bird monitoring Key bird species important in restoration processes include species that play a pivotal role in the spreading of seeds. Kereru is the only bird species left that is capable of dispersing the larger seeds. Kereru eat the fruit of at least 70 species of plants. Kokako also play a role in seed dispersal, eating a wide variety of fruits. However, as they are poor fliers, they are probably less important in long-distance dispersal of seed than kereru. Kokako will need to be reintroduced to Maungatautari, the last population having disappeared sometime in the 1980 s. Kaka and tui play an important role in pollination, and an increase in the population numbers of these species will help to improve ecosystem functioning. Because of this, it is important that information on, e.g. population size, is gathered. Five minute bird counts are the most widely used method in New Zealand for assessing bird community abundance and diversity (Dawson and Bull 1975). Although there are concerns about this method, it is still widely used (Saunders 2000) and is considered a useful tool for gauging gross changes in the distribution of individual species, for assessing bird community health, and as an indicator of ecosystem health. Because the conspicuousness of birds differs seasonally, counts must be repeated at the same time of year for comparison. November/December is the time of greatest conspicuousness for most native birds. A bird survey has been carried out by Innes et al. (2002). Thirty-six permanent bird counting stations, spaced at fifteen minute walk intervals along four access tracks were located on Maungatautari. Thirty-four stations, spaced at the same intervals, were established on Mt. Pirongia as a reference site. The observers spent equal amounts of time on each mountain, and counts were made twice in 2002 (November and December). A second technique was also used in which the maximum number of tui, kereu and bellbird seen or heard at any one time per thirty minute observation period were counted. This technique is used only by Landcare Research, but appears to provide a robust measure amongst different observers. Working Document last revision September

94 These surveys, using the same methods and the same counting stations, should be repeated every year by experienced recorders. This will provide a robust data base to show the affects of the restoration management on bird populations. The method could also be expanded to provide additional data, while still retaining comparability with previous data. To obtain detailed information on a particular bird population, there are several techniques that can be used to measure population size and breeding success. These techniques require experienced personnel and involve repeated territory mapping over defined study areas, or following survival of banded birds over time. Acquiring information on breeding success requires finding nests (usually by placing transmitters on birds to locate nests), then observing nests until fledging. In addition to monitoring, thorough species lists must be generated before any introductions begin to establish what is already on the mountain and what the size of the population is Bat monitoring Bat populations are difficult to monitor as they are highly cryptic and nocturnal making them difficult to count directly, except sometimes outside roost sites. Longtailed bat colonies roost in cavities, often in large old trees and move to new roosting trees almost every night so that colonies can be widely distributed across the landscape (O'Donnell and Langton 2003). Indirect measurements are often made using ultrasonic detectors at foraging grounds. Guidelines for carrying out monitoring programmes for long-tailed bat populations are outlined in O'Donnell and Sedgeley (2001). O'Donnell and Langton (2003) found that if 100 transects were monitored for bat activity annually, it would take years to detect declines of nearly 3% in the population. Alternatively, monitoring could be carried out with more frequency for a shorter duration to detect the same declines. Bat monitoring should be conducted at Maungatautari and a reference site (Mt. Pirongia) at sufficient intervals to provide a measurement of changes in the population Mammalian pest monitoring Mammalian pest monitoring will be required both prior to eradication being undertaken and after eradication has occurred. Monitoring will become critical when the area is deemed to be pest free in order to detect any pest incursions quickly and the ability to detect low levels of pests may well be the key to the success of this project. After poisoning, monitoring will need to be carried out to verify eradication. This can be carried out using footprint tracking tunnels. An opportunity exists with the two enclosures to experiment on the placement of tracking tunnels to remain sensitive to low numbers of predators for the least effort. Indirect methods can also be used such as monitoring the regeneration of seedlings, a lack of bait take, monitoring bird counts and nesting success. However, as most of these will respond to very low pest Working Document last revision September

95 numbers, monitoring of this kind cannot be used to show complete eradication of pests. Transmitters on pest animals will help to judge the effectiveness of poisoning efforts. For example, at Karori Wildlife Sanctuary, transmitters were attached to two feral cats and three stoats to determine if these species were affected by secondary poisoning (Empson 2000). Autopsies were then performed after death to determine the amount of poison in their livers. Predator dogs can also be used to confirm the successful eradication of pests. Intensive pest monitoring will be required for perpetuity to detect any pests that are either not completely eradicated by poisoning or which breach the fence afterwards (e.g. rats or mice that are carried in the talons of harriers and which escape unharmed). This will require an intensive indefinite monitoring regime including regular visual inspections of traps and tracking tunnels and of the fence to ensure its integrity is maintained, checking for sign of fence breaches by pests, such as the digging of burrows and an alarm wire to enable a quick response to fence breaches such as tree fall. Conventional monitoring techniques involve trapping and tracking tunnels. These require regular inspections and rebaiting. They must be maintained indefinitely and so the frequent servicing causes habitat damage. If they are not inspected often (every 2-4 weeks), animals cannot be detected quickly enough to control their populations (C. King pers. comm.). Modelling suggests that 350 tunnels would be needed to detect one stoat on 10,000ha with 75% confidence (assuming a probability of 0.7 that as stoat encountering a tunnel would enter it, home ranges averaging 50ha with 20% overlap, and that each tunnel samples 1.5ha (Choquenot et al. 2001). To run 100 tunnels on Maungatautari with manual inspection could take at least 3-6 person days to check and thus the organisation and labour costs will be daunting. Mice, with much smaller home ranges, will require many more tracking tunnels. At Karori Wildlife Sanctuary, bait stations were installed on a 50 x 100m grid throughout the valley and tracking tunnels on a grid of 100 x 200m. Mice have since reinvaded Karori and will be eradicated using bait stations on 50 x 50m grid (Empson 2000). New monitoring technology is being developed and the inventors are keen to test equipment at Maungatautari. The Scentinel, developed by The University of Waikato and HortResearch, is a smart bait dispenser and long term monitor for mammalian pests. Daily reporting is carried out remotely greatly reducing labour inputs. Other advantages include multispecies detection, a permanent bait lure with long-life (12 months) bait, low maintenance costs and reduced human scent and habitat damage around stations. This technology will be further refined and enhanced during field trials at Maungatautari comparing conventional monitoring to the Scentinel. It is hoped that this technology will provide cheap effective monitoring in the future Invertebrate monitoring Monitoring of invertebrates is difficult because of temporal and spatial variation in abundance and diversity and because of problems with dealing with large numbers of samples of poorly known species. There are difficulties in monitoring low densities Working Document last revision September

96 of invertebrates. For example, searching for giant land snails (even those tagged with receivers) badly disrupts their habitat. This may expose the snails to a greater risk of desiccation, probably their main natural cause of mortality (Sherley 1994). The two most common methods to sample and monitor invertebrate communities over time are to use pitfall traps and malaise traps. Wasp populations should be monitored as part of research into their effects on ecosystem processes and to record the success of any control trials. Peter Maddison has begun an invertebrate survey on Maungatautari, using pitfall traps and twig traps. Invertebrates have been collected and identified monthly from these traps and will provide useful background data on biodiversity before pest control. A more quantitative approach should also be undertaken. Translocated invertebrates such as giant weta or large snails can by monitored using mark/recapture studies and microtransmitters for relocating individuals Reptile and amphibian monitoring Reptile and amphibian communities are difficult to monitor due to low numbers (where predators exist) and their cryptic behaviour. Monitoring can be carried out by searching in likely habitats for a standardised time and recording diversity and abundance of animals seen. Alternatively, Whitaker (1994) recommends using open and baited (with peaches or pears) 2-litre paint tins as pitfall traps for lizards set in the ground near dense ground cover for several nights. Spotlighting techniques are also useful for geckos when carried out by trained spotters. It is hoped that monitoring of lizard species will be started in the summer of 2003/2004. One method could be to set up pitfall lines to run from the main northern track to the summit. This will include all but two of the vegetation zones present on the mountain and seems to be a good compromise between habitat types surveyed and ease of access to traps. Frog surveys will need to be undertaken before any releases can be made. Climate data may also need to be collected for at least three years before releases can be made to help assess the suitability of Maungatautari for Archey s frog Water quality monitoring Water quality and biota should be monitored as a measure of meeting the ecological goal of The waters draining the mountain are clean, and the waterways provide habitat for a diverse aquatic flora and fauna. Environment Waikato has been approached and is considering the possibility of installing a weir and raingauge at a focal catchment on a stream on the northern side of the mountain that the perimeter fence will cross (Bill Garlands property) and including this site as part of its water quality and stream monitoring network. This site could also be used to monitor the effectiveness of fish passage through the fence stream crossing. Measurements of suspended sediments and faecal coliforms should Working Document last revision September

97 be included in the water quality monitoring to provide an indication of water quality. Aquatic invertebrate measurements can also be used to provide an indication of stream health. 1.8.Key indicator species monitoring Where funds for monitoring are limited, intensive monitoring of a few key species can provide an indication of ecosystem recovery. The following species can be considered key indicator species: Plants Northern rata Kohekohe Kamahi Birds Kereru Species Monitor for: Growth, reproduction and population increase Numbers fledging tomtit Invertebrates Weta Age class distribution and roost occupancy 2. Continuing Protection for Maungatautari The mountain will be protected from mammalian pests by the fence, but weeds must be removed and other pests (exotic invertebrates, fungi, diseases) must be managed. People must be managed to ensure they do not impact on the restoration and a separate management plan should be written for visitors Mammalian pests The predator proof fence has been designed to prevent mammals re-entering the mountain once they have been eradicated, and should provide near total protection. Monitoring is needed to ensure that no mammals breach the fence or enter the enclosure in unusual ways, such as in the talons of a harrier or morepork, or through deliberate vandalism. Plans need to be made for when breaches in the fence occur, including plans for regular monitoring, response to alarms etc. Plans and resources will also be needed to assess the size and nature of the detected intrusion, detail the response and ensure appropriate resources are available to respond appropriately Weeds There are few weeds on Maungatautari, and those that are present are mostly confined to the forest margins. Weeds that are present include some blackberry and gorse on Working Document last revision September

98 the western side (Jim Mylchreest pers.comm.). Blackberry will need to be removed, but gorse may act as a nurse plant for the growth of natives and it may be best to leave the gorse here. This will require debate as gorse may change the properties of the site (through N fixation). The nurse effect of gorse may not be an issue where the gorses spines will not be needed for protection from mammalian predators. An ecologist should assess this site to advise volunteers on the best use of their time for weed removal here. There is also a five to ten hectare area on reserve land that has been planted with pines and gumtrees. These may need to be removed as soon as possible with minimal disturbance to let the forest recover; again an ecologist should advise the best action to take here. Opening the forest canopy for fence construction will encourage high light requiring weeds to grow (particularly weeds from the nearby pasture). Once fence construction is complete, weeding should be carried out and suitable low growing native plants planted to suppress weed growth. Continuous monitoring should be carried out to detect any new weed incursions so they can be controlled before becoming serious problems. Removal of noxious weed species on neighbouring farms will greatly help to reduce the spread of weeds into the bush. Surrounding landowners should be encouraged to remove weedy species (especially those that animals are likely to disperse deep into the bush) and plant natives instead. Questions: Should gorse be removed or left to act as a nurse species? Should the planted pine and gum trees be removed and how? 2.3. Invertebrate pests Several species of introduced wasps in New Zealand have a significant impact on native ecosystems, thus we should try to quantify their impacts on Maungatautari. The biomass of the common wasp (Vespula vulgaris) can reach figures as great as or greater than the combined biomass of all birds, rodents and stoats in the forest. Wasps may take as much prey biomass as 8.1 kilograms per hectare per season and they have even been recorded killing nestling birds (Moller 1990). Wasps could therefore have serious impacts on native fauna, as direct predators, and as competitors with insectivorous and nectivorus birds, bats and insects. The impacts of wasps have been most studied in beech forests where they greatly influence the food chain by taking a large share of the honeydew resource (Beggs 2001). Further research is required to determine how large an impact wasps have on the ecology in forests without honeydew. Effective control of wasps is not easy as they forage up to 4km from their nest and some queen wasps are estimated to fly up to 30-70km before establishing a nest (Beggs 2001). Wasps are hard to attract to protein-based bait, particularly in nonhoneydew forests, and carbohydrate baits cannot be used because of the risk of poisoning honeybees. A wasp parasitoid that has been released has not measurably reduced wasp abundance (Beggs 2001). Research is necessary to produce an effective Working Document last revision September

99 control method for wasps over large areas. So far, there has been little success with aerial applications of poison (Harris and Rees 2000). Questions: What are the ecological impacts of wasps on the mountain? What other invertebrate pests are on the mountain? 2.4. People (visitors, field workers and researchers) High visitor numbers do not necessarily have to have an impact on restoration, however this should be assessed regularly. A separate plan dealing with educational and recreational needs on the mountain should be developed to ensure visitor needs are met without compromising ecological goals. Both Tiritiri Matangi Island and the Karori Santuary have succeeded in restoring an area while still having high visitor numbers. In the financial year, there were over 45,000 visitors to Karori (Karori Sanctuary Trust 2003). It is not necessary to contain these visitors, but it is necessary to educate them to stick to paths. Most visitors will only walk short distances and the appropriate placement of interpretive signage and feeding stations which can attract birds to areas of high visitor traffic, will lessen impacts elsewhere. Public impact at Tiritiri Matangi is lessened by a well defined network of tracks and boardwalks directing visitors away from sensitive areas ( At Maungatautari, visitor impacts will be minimised by attracting the majority of visitors to the two fenced enclosures on the mountain. Interpretive signage and feeding stations should provide a valuable visitor experience. Smaller numbers of visitors will walk over the rest of the mountain and there should be educational signage to minimise their impacts (e.g. messages to stick to paths, do not disturb wildlife etc). The path network over the mountain may need to be increased in the future to cater for these visitors but direct them away from sensitive ecological areas. Field workers should follow best practice procedures when carrying out their duties on the mountain e.g. ensuring sensitive animal populations are not disturbed while checking tracking tunnels. Research on Maungatautari needs to be regulated to ensure there is no conflict with the ecological goals of the restoration. Research carried out on the mountain will require approval from the Science and Research Committee before commencement. A simple form will be used to assess research proposals and researchers will be required to adhere to a set of rules pertaining to Maungatautari (Appendix 8). 3. Connections With the Surrounding Landscape Surrounding landowners should be encouraged to plant native forest corridors to provide connections from Maungatautari to the surrounding landscape. Working Document last revision September

100 To be truly successful, the restoration of Maungatautari will involve restoring connections from the mountain to the surrounding landscape so that animals can disperse from one mountain island to another, much as they would have done before such drastic habitat fragmentation. To achieve this goal, surrounding land owners should be encouraged to plant native forest corridors of appropriate species to provide connections across the landscape. Riparian zones offer a natural area which can be fenced from stock and planted appropriately. Landowners should also be encouraged to carry out pest control to minimise the risk to animals which will not remain confined within the pest free enclosures. Monitoring of animal populations in the surrounding district will be useful to show the connectivity of the mountain with the surrounding landscape. Working Document last revision September

101 4. Risks to the Restoration of Maungatautari and Amelioration of the Risks Note that a more comprehensive risk management plan should be produced for the whole project, including more detail on mammalian pest eradication. Risk The pest-free status of Maungatautari is not able to be achieved Outcome Sensitive birds and other animals currently absent from Maungatautari will not be able to be returned. Sensitive birds already released in the reserve may succumb to predation. Prevention/Mitigation Remove pests using current best practices as established on offshore islands. Develop a response strategy for living with low pest numbers in the short term if follow up eradication is not immediately feasible. Risk The pest-free status of Maungatautari is not able to be maintained. Outcome Sensitive birds and other animals currently absent from Maungatautari will not be able to be returned. Sensitive birds already released in the reserve may succumb to predation. Prevention/Mitigation Maintain an intensive monitoring program within the reserve to respond quickly to any pest incursions. Maintain a consistent monitoring program of the fence to immediately repair breeches. Ensure regular fence maintenance occurs. Risk The project does not run for perpetuity. Outcome Maintenance of the reserve ceases the fence fails and pest numbers increase, risking the populations of sensitive animals living here. Prevention/Mitigation Keep a high level of public enthusiasm which can be sustained over several generations e.g. by timed release of new animals to the reserve. Risk Erosion of the uniqueness of Maungatautari as other similar projects come about and/or public access to wildlife increases. Outcome Decline in visitor numbers and funding, or increased competition for funds. Prevention/Mitigation Maintain a worthwhile visitor experience which ensures people still do visit. Risk Working Document last revision September

102 Bird reintroductions are not approved by the Department of Conservation. Outcome Birds lost from Maungatautari are unable to be established. Prevention/Mitigation Ensure proper protocols, documentation and dialogue is maintained with DOC to ensure this does not happen. Risk Failure to capture suitable animals for re-establishment at Maungatautari. Outcome Some key animal species are unable to be released on Maungatautari. Prevention/Mitigation Ensure best practice methods are used to capture animals. MEIT facilitate recovery of suitable source populations to ensure individuals are available for transfer. Risk Some bird introductions fail because the species does not adapt to the new surroundings and flies home (home imprint is strong). Outcome Some key bird species are unable to establish on Maungatautari. Prevention/Mitigation Use best practice establishment techniques for birds with strong natal imprinting, such as translocating very young birds, playing bird calls and captive rearing on site if necessary. Risk Disease affects animal populations Outcome Animal populations decline as result of disease Prevention/Mitigation Quarantine animals before translocating to Maungatautari to ensure they are disease free. Use supplementary feeders that do not promote the spread of disease. Risk Unusual weather patterns affect health of animal populations Outcome Animal populations decline Prevention/Mitigation Intervention may be necessary for some important species e.g. supplementary feeding, artificial shelters in the establishment phase. Acceptance that the mountain cannot sustain that particular species in the longer term. Risk Failure of food supply for an animal group Outcome The population of that animal declines Prevention/Mitigation Supplementary feeding may be appropriate in the establishment phase Acceptance that the mountain cannot sustain that particular species in the longer term. Working Document last revision September

103 Risk Populations of birds spread beyond the protected boundaries of the mountain. Outcome Potentially high death rates caused by predation outside the fenced area Prevention/Mitigation Encourage farmers to carry out intensive pest control on land surrounding the reserve. Acceptance that the mountain cannot sustain that particular species in the longer term. Risk Some animals are unavailable for reintroduction due to iwi and community reluctance to remove individuals from source populations. Outcome Some animal groups are unable to be reintroduced to Maungatautari. Prevention/Mitigation Begin an early, constructive dialogue with all stakeholders Risk Insufficient monitoring of released animals, so little is learnt. Outcome The reasons for any failures are unknown and could be repeated in the future. Any easily fixed causes of population decline are not acted on and the introduction fails. Prevention/mitigation Every reintroduction to be backed by a detailed work plan which includes a monitoring program after release. Reintroduction budgets to include the costs of continued monitoring. Risks Founder populations of reintroduced species are too small Outcome Introduced species are slow to establish or establishment fails due to insufficient population size. Prevention/Mitigation Research each species thoroughly before translocating to determine adequate founder population sizes. Use successful introductions on offshore islands as a guide. Risks Animal species fail to establish for unknown reasons Outcome Key animal species are unable to be established on Maungatautari Prevention/mitigation Monitor and record all aspects of introductions to learn from mistakes. Risks Insufficient funding for the project Outcome Key functions are not adequately carried out e.g. fence maintenance is not carried out leading to a risk of pest incursions. Monitoring is not done and nothing is learnt from the releases. Working Document last revision September

104 Prevention/Mitigation Ensure funding levels are adequate to maintain project momentum before releasing any sensitive species. Ensure the Trust is set up in such a way that funds cannot be embezzled. Risk Newly established bird populations are compromised by poaching Outcome Some bird species become extinct on Maungatautari after the effort of reintroduction Prevention/Mitigation Assess security and public access to the mountain. Risk Native animals that have the potential to compromise other native species are released e.g. weka. Outcome Some sensitive species fail to establish due to predation by other native species. Prevention/Mitigation The sequence and type of introductions follow the restoration plan so top predators are not released to the reserve too early. Species that may compromise restoration goals over the mountain are confined to certain areas for the foreseeable future. Acceptance that some species may not establish due to predation by other native species which are already present (e.g. self-introduced) on the mountain. Risks Visitor numbers increase to such a high level that they compromise the restoration goals. Outcome Ecosystem function is compromised and some species are unable to be returned because of this. Prevention/mitigation Control visitors by providing guided tours. Provide educational information and signage to minimise visitor impacts. Provide shoe washing stations and bag inspection areas to minimise risk of weed, pathogens and mice introductions. Provide walking tracks. Working Document last revision September

105 References Allen, R. B RECCE- An inventory method for describing New Zealand vegetation. Ministry of Forestry. Allen, R. B A permanent plot method for monitoring changes in indigenous forests. Manaaki Whenua-Landcare Research, Christchurch. Atkinson, I. A. E Presidential address: opportunities for ecological restoration. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 11:1-12. Atkinson, I. A. E Guidelines to the development and monitoring of ecological restoration programmes. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Atkinson, I. A. E Introduced mammals and models for restoration. Biological Conservation 99: Beggs, J The ecological consequences of social wasps (Vespula spp.) invading an ecosystem that has an abundant carbohydrate resource. Biological Conservation 99: Choquenot, D., W. C. Ruscoe, and E. Murphy Colonisation of new areas by stoats: time to establishment and requirements for detection. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 25: Dawson, D. G., and P. C. Bull Counting birds in New Zealand forests. Notornis 22: Empson, R Eradication of pests from Karori Wildlife Sanctuary: a brief summary. in Paper presented at Mainland Island Hui, St Arnaud July Frampton, C. M., C. J. Pekelharing, and I. J. Payton A fast method for monitoring foliage density in single lower-canopy trees. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 72: Harris, R. J., and J. S. Rees Aerial Poisoning of Wasps. Department of Conservatin, Wellington. Innes, J., B. Burns, N. Fitzgerald, D. Thornburrow, and C. Watts Pre-mammal eradication bird counts at Maungatautari and Pirongia, November-December Prepared for: Foundation for Research, Science and Technology, with Landcare Research NSOF funding Landcare Research Contract Report: 0203/095, Hamilton. Karori Sanctuary Trust, I Annual Report July June Karori Sanctuary Trust (Inc.). MacGibbon, R Maungatautari Ecological Restoration Project Plan. Prepared for: Waipa District Council, The Department of Conservation, The Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust. Natural Logic Ltd, Taupo. McKelvey, P. J Synecology of the west Taupo indigenous forest. in. New Zealand Forest Service Bulletin 14. Nicholls, J. L N66 Matamata. in Ecological Survey of New Zealand's Indigenous Forests: type map series no.2., Forest Research Institute, Rotorua. O'Donnell, C. F. J., and S. Langton Power to detect trends in abundance of long-tailed bats (Chalinolobus tuberculatus) using counts on line transects. Department of Conservation, Wellington. O'Donnell, C. F. J., and J. A. Sedgeley Guidelines for surveying and monitoring long-tailed bat populations using line transects. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Working Document last revision September

106 Perfect, A. J Hauturu/Little Barrier Island forest condition report 1999 and 2000 field seasons. Saunders, A A review of Department of Conservation mainland restoration projects and recommendations for further action. Department of Conservation, Wellington. Sherley, G Translocations of the Mahoenui giant weta Deinacrida n. sp. and Placostylus land snails in New Zealand: what have we learnt? Pages in M. Serena, editor. Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Whitaker, A. H Survey Methods for Lizards. Department of Conservation Threatened Species Unit, Wellington. Working Document last revision September

107 Appendix 7: Common and Scientific Names Used Plants Beech Blackberry Fivefinger Gorse Green mistletoe Gum tree Kamahi Kohekohe Northern rata Pine Rata Titoki Tree fushia White mistletoe Birds Bellbird (korimako) Harrier (Australasian) Kaka Kereru (wood pigeon) Kokako Morepork (ruru) Tomtit Tui Mammals Cat Dog Long tailed bat Mouse Possum Ship rat Stoat Amphibians Archey's frog Invertebrates Giant land snail Mahoenui giant weta Wasps Weta Nothofagus spp. Rubus fruticosus Pseudopanax arboreus Ulex europaeus Ileostylus micranthus Eucalyptus spp. Weinmannia racemosa Dysoxylum spectabile Metrosideros robusta Pinus radiata Metrosideros spp. Alectryon excelsus Fushia exorticata Tupeia Antarctica Anthornis melanura Circus approximans Nestor meridionalis Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae Callaeas cinerea wilsoni Ninox novaeseelandiae novaeseelandiae Petroica macrocephala Prosthemadera novaeseelandiae Felis cattus Canis familiaris Chalinolobus tuberculatus Mus musculus Trichosurus vulpecula Rattus rattus Mustela erminea Leiopelma archeyi Placostylus ambagiosus Deinacrida n. sp. Vespula spp. Deinacrida spp. Working Document last revision September

108 Appendix 8: Application to Conduct Scientific Research on Maungatautari The application should be sent to: Science and Research Committee Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust PO Box Wilson Street Cambridge Section 1 (Please attach a copy of your research proposal addressing the issues outlined in section 2) Note: MEIT refers to the Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust 1. Title of research study: a) Name of applicant b) Contact phone numbers (day) (evening) c) Contact address 2. Name of organisation(s) authorising and/or sponsoring the study 3. Name of principal researcher/supervisor a) Contact phone numbers (day) (evening) b) Contact address Working Document last revision September

109 4. Names of all other people participating in or assisting with this research 5. Location of research on Maungatautari (map or GPS co-ordinates) 6. I have enclosed (please tick) A research application proposal (see section 2) A hazard identification/risk assessment report (see section 4) Ethics committee approval if relevant Other authorisation required I have read and understood the terms and conditions stated in the research policy (section 5) for carrying out research on Maungatautari and hereby agree that I will not compromise the ecological goals of the project by carrying out this research. 7. Applicant s signature: Date: Section 2 Each applicant is required to provide a 1-2 page proposal which includes the following information: A description of the objective of the study A description of the proposed methodology, location, equipment and timing of the study. When necessary copies of any animal ethics committee approvals should be included. A brief description of the credentials of the researcher and other people (e.g. supervisor when applicable) associated with the study, noting their familiarity with the methodology, apparatus, species concerned etc. Consideration of the likely impacts of the research proposal on the target species, incidental species, habitat or site, with particular reference to effects on population size, species viability or habitat/site modification. In addition, impacts of the research on the ecological goals of Maungatautari must be included, including risks to the Xcluder fence and risk of mammal incursion into pest free areas. Consideration of the benefits of the research. Working Document last revision September

110 The relevance of the proposal to the objectives and goals of the MEIT. List any other permit or authority required from other agencies e.g. permits for vegetation collection. Consideration of iwi and historical values if applicable. Description of reports or other outputs that will be produced from the research. Any third party confidentiality clauses (there is an expectation that research findings will be made available to MEIT to assist with the management of the Maungatautari Ecological Island. If this is not the case, please specify). Section 3 Criteria for approval of applications for scientific study on Maungatautari Each application for scientific study must meet the following criteria and conditions to the satisfaction of MEIT Science and Research Committee before approval will be given. That the purpose and objectives of the study are clearly stated and described identifying that the study will increase the knowledge of the natural or cultural environment on Maungatautari. That the objectives and purpose of the study are compatible with the goals of the restoration of Maungatautari. That Maungatautari is an appropriate site for the study and that alternative sites of lesser conservation value do not offer the same context for the proposed study. That the methodologies and research apparatus or structures have been designed to ensure minimum damage or detrimental effect to target species, incidental species, habitats and the ecological restoration goals of Maungatautari as a whole. That the research contributes to the body of knowledge of Maungatautari. Section 4 Hazard Identification form Nature and description of hazard Describe the harm if any Risk rating (low, moderate, high) Eliminate, isolate or minimise? Identify how the hazard is currently controlled Detail additional controls that will be put in place Working Document last revision September

111 Section 5 Policy for Research at or associated with Maungatautari Ecological Island 1. Research projects must be consistent with the vision and project goals and must not compromise the integrity of the goals of the Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust. 2. Research proposals in the approved template form must be submitted to the MEIT Science and Research Committee for approval before commencement. Proposals must include sufficient lead time for the MEIT Science and Research Committee and iwi representatives to consider them thoroughly (this would normally be at least 2 months in advance of the proposed commencement date). 3. Where necessary, research projects must receive appropriate animal ethics, HSNO, or Resource Management approval prior to commencement where this is relevant. 4. Research providers must show that they have policies and procedures in place to cover occupational health and safety requirements. 5. Results from research projects conducted on the Maungatautari Ecological Island must be made available to MEIT in the form of written reports. 6. The research provider and MEIT will own any intellectual property rights generated in the course of the research project in proportion to their respective contributions. 7. Research providers who take samples (i.e., biological material, soils) from Maungatautari must lodge the samples: either in a Nationally Significant Collection, where relevant, and/or in a recognised Waikato based biological collection. 8. MEIT and the research provider will seek written permission from the other party prior to issuing any media releases concerning the research project, or prior to posting material relating to it on a publicly available website. 9. Where possible, researchers will locate plots at or near existing monitoring plots in order to concentrate the impact of research and to support crossproject analysis. 10. Any markings (flags, tapes, etc.) established on the Maungatautari Ecological Island during the course of research to mark tracks, plots etc. will be removed once the research is complete. 11. Where researchers need to cross private land to gain access to the Maungatautari Ecological Island, they will gain permission from those landowners and respect their property while crossing the land (e.g., gates, fences, stock). Working Document last revision September