1
Conservation of the North Island Brown Kiwi (Apteryx mantelli):
current approaches, the successes and limitations, and proposals to
ensure long term continuity.
Jack Keast, Tara Kelly, Hayden Moorhouse, Jonathan Tan, & Shih-Yun Wei (2010)
School of Biological Sciences
Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington 6012, New Zealand
ABSTRACT
The kiwi (Apteryx spp.) is from an ancient lineage that has come to be uniquely and
evolutionary distinct. Endemic to New Zealand, its numbers have steadily declined since
the arrival of the first human inhabitants into the country. In the mid 1990s, a new
conservation approach, comprised of Operation Nest Egg and crèching, was initiated by
the Department of Conservation in an attempt to reverse the population decline, by
artificially incubating kiwi eggs and releasing the chicks into controlled predator-free
environments where they can be monitored. Three of these key sites, at varying levels of
predator presence, were reviewed: (1) Cape Kidnappers and Ocean Beach Wildlife
Preserve, (2) Boundary Stream Mainland Island, and (3) Opouahi Pan Pac Kiwi Crèche;
that focuses on recovery of the North Island brown kiwi (A. mantelli). However,
assessments showed that the kiwi populations at these sites are at risk of inbreeding
depressions and are potentially of mixed genetic makeup. Moreover, population
viability is jeopardised due to natural dispersal and movement inhibitions, calling for
continued monitoring and human intervention that involves increasing costs. A review
of current local approaches and potential to learn from international initiatives should
be undertaken to guarantee the long-term prospects of kiwi conservation.
Keywords
North Island brown kiwi, taxonomy, conservation, Cape Kidnappers, Boundary Stream,
Opouahi crèche, population viability, genetic management.
2
3
CONTENTS _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Objectives 5
1.2 Background 5
1.2.1 Kiwi Taxonomy 6
1.2.2 Kiwi Biology and Ecology 8
1.2.3 Plights of the Kiwi 9
1.3 History of Kiwi Conservation 11
1.4 BNZ Operation Nest Egg and Kiwi Crèche 12
2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Methods Employed 14
2.2 Advantages 15
2.3 Disadvantages 15
2.4 Limitations 15
3.0 FOCUS SITES
3.1 Cape Kidnappers and Ocean Beach Wildlife Preserve 16
3.1.1 Layout and Initial Setup 16
3.1.2 Return of the Kiwi 17
3.1.3 Funding and Costs 18
3.2 Boundary Stream Mainland Island 18
3.2.1 Past and Current Management 18
3.2.2 Predator Control 19
3.2.3 Reintroductions of the Kiwi 20
3.3 Opouahi Pan Pac Kiwi Crèche 20
4
4.0 DISCUSSION
4.1 Population Dynamics and Viability 23
4.1.1 Predation Risks 23
4.1.2 Reserve Size and Habitat Fragmentation 24
4.2 Phylogenetic Variation and Management 26
4.3 Cost Effectiveness 29
4.4 International vs. Local Conservation Approaches 30
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 33
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 34
REFERENCES 35
APPENDICES 39
5
1.0 INTRODUCTION
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.1 Objectives
This report has been prepared in an effort to contribute to the overall conservation
practices currently in place for New Zealand’s iconic national bird, specifically the North
Island Brown Kiwi (Apteryx mantelli), by aiming to:
Establish an insight into the issues and concerns affecting kiwi management,
including their biology, behaviour and conservation history.
Define and analyse the current procedures of the Bank of New Zealand (BNZ)
Operation Nest Egg (ONE) and kiwi crèche, sanctioned by the Department of
Conservation (DOC).
Identify the current North Island brown kiwi population dynamics within three
key sites in the Hawke’s Bay region of New Zealand.
Provide an assessment on the success of these key sites in kiwi conservation and
breeding through an analysis of the population viability, genetic management
and cost effectiveness.
Examine current local initiatives for kiwi in comparison to international efforts
involving other endangered species.
Explore recommendations and improvements to future kiwi conservation
approaches.
1.2 Background
Endemic to New Zealand, the kiwi is known to have evolved around 65 million years
ago (Holzapfel, et al., 2008). Before the arrival of humans in the 13th century, kiwi
populations were more widespread (DOC, 2004) and could have been as high as 12
million birds. Today, the total kiwi population is estimated to be only circa 80,000 birds.
All taxa are at risk, with some more so than others (BirdLife International, 2008). Also,
given their rarity, very few New Zealanders have ever seen one in the wild (Peat, 2006).
6
1.2.1 Kiwi Taxonomy
Initially, there were only three species of kiwi; the brown, the great spotted and little
spotted. Over the past two decades, the introduction and use of genetic and biological
data in the early 1990s was a major breakthrough in kiwi species classification,
especially in the revision of brown kiwi phylogeny. Genetic analysis has resulted in the
current identification of five formally recognised species, with 4 geographically and
genetically distinct races distinguished within two of these species (Sales, 2005)
(Holzapfel, et al., 2008).
Class: Aves
Order: Apterygiformes
Family: Apterygidae
Species: North Island Brown Kiwi Apteryx mantelli
Okarito Brown Kiwi/Rowi Apteryx rowi
Southern Tokoeka Apteryx australis
Great Spotted Kiwi Apteryx haastii
Little Spotted Kiwi Apteryx owenii
The North Island brown kiwi is further split into the following races: the Northland;
Coromandel; Eastern; and Western populations. Additionally, four races of the Southern
tokoeka are also recognised: the Haast; Stewart Island; Northern Fiordland; and
Southern Fiordland populations (DOC, 2004). However, ongoing genetic analysis
continues to confirm these classifications. As such, the uniqueness in the Haast
population of the Southern tokoeka is still awaiting formal description, and may be
elevated to species distinction (BirdLife International, 2008).
7
Figure 1. Map showing the current distribution of the various kiwi species in New
Zealand. Also featured are 5 kiwi sanctuaries set up on mainland New Zealand during
2000. Each sanctuary focuses on a specific kiwi taxon: Whangarei on the Northland
North Island brown kiwi, Moehau on the Coromandel North Island brown kiwi,
Tongariro Forest on the Western North Island brown kiwi, South Okarito Forest on the
Okarito rowi, and Haast Range on the Haast tokoeka (BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust, 2011).
8
1.2.2 Kiwi Biology and Ecology
The kiwi has tiny vestigial wings and no external tail (Holzapfel, et al., 2008). The birds
have a slow metabolic rate and low body temperature, which are both adaptations to
enhance energy conservation, and most likely motivated flightlessness. Dimorphism
also occurs with females generally being larger than males (Sales, 2005).
The kiwi has a highly developed sense of smell. Their bills are highly efficient at probing
for food and have specialised pressure sensing nerve endings, which help in detecting
vibrations of invertebrate in the soil (Sales, 2005). There is also evidence that kiwi
sometimes feed in rivers and streams, often indulging in freshwater crustaceans like
koura, highlighting kiwi’s ability to swim (Peat, 2006).
Largely nocturnal, the birds leave their burrows at dusk to forage for food (Holzapfel, et
al., 2008). However, there is evidence of Stewart Island kiwi foraging in the day, due to
several factors. For example, females incubate their eggs at night, low concentrations of
food, and/or short summer nights on the island, resulting in only five hours of darkness
during mid-summer (Peat, 2006).
Kiwi pair bonds are usually long term. Highly territorial, the paired birds employ
olfactory signals to mark territories and use far-carrying shrill and guttural calls to
communicate with each other when out foraging (McLennan, 1988) (Sales, 2005). When
not foraging, kiwi shelter and nest in burrows, hollow logs or under dense vegetation
(Holzapfel, et al., 2008). These burrows can be found all over a kiwi’s territory, with
some species having several entry points and others just having one (Peat, 2006).
Egg laying and incubation behaviour varies among the different species (Colbourne,
2002) (DOC, 2004). Kiwi eggs are one of the largest eggs relative to body weight of all
birds (Bassett, McLennan, & Blackwell, 2005). Female kiwi usually laid two egg clutches,
due to having two functioning ovaries, but the rarest species often lay only one egg
(Peat, 2006). In some species, the male undertakes the entire incubation process, a
period of up to two and a half months (Sales, 2005). In other species, the incubation of
the eggs is shared between both partners (Holzapfel, et al., 2008).
Sharing incubation can be beneficial in cooler climates, where an egg would rapidly lose
heat if left uncovered for a few hours every night. Those species that do not share
9
incubation also have to go to the effort of protecting their burrows and eggs when out
foraging. On leaving their burrows, some species will cover the entrance with leaves and
branches (Peat, 2006).
Chicks are precocial (McLennan, et al., 2004) and receive no food from their parents,
living off the remnants of their yolk sac in the first week (Peat, 2006). In some species
chicks become independent at 2-6 weeks, whereas others remain with their parents in a
family group for up to 7 years (Holzapfel, et al., 2008). Location, population size, habitat
size and resource availability are likely to determine the time at which chicks become
independent. Chicks will take 3-5 years to reach adult size, and with a lack of predation,
should live for 25 to 50 years, depending on the species (Holzapfel, et al., 2008).
1.2.3 Plights of the Kiwi
Historically, the kiwi is killed for their meat and feathers (Robertson, 2003), while their
habitats are destroyed by land clearing. By 1980, with the added pressure of predation
by introduced species, kiwi populations were in full decline. Today, at least ten
mainland birds die on a daily basis (Peat, 2006). Mortality rates and the main cause of
death differ significantly depending on the species and their location.
Habitat loss and predation are still the main threats to kiwi (Saunders & Norton, 2001).
During the 19th century, extensive burning and clearing of forests for agriculture was
undertaken. In the middle of the 20th century, this was further encouraged, with the
government offering subsidies and tax incentives for converting forests into workable
farmland (Peat, 2006). Consequently, many mainland kiwi populations are now
restricted to small ‘islands’ of remaining forest and scrub, either managed and
unmanaged (Potter, 1990). Elsewhere, other populations are isolated on offshore
islands around New Zealand.
These populations are further threatened by predation from stoats (Mustela ermina),
ferrets (M. furo), dogs (Canis lupus familiaris), feral cats (Felis silvestris catus), rats
(Rattus rattus and R. norvegicus), pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus), hedgehogs (Erinaceus
europaeus) and possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) (McLennan, et al., 1996) (Robertson,
2003). Dogs are often the main threat to adult kiwi, especially in the North Island.
10
On the other hand, possums and hedgehogs often prey on eggs; while stoats and cats are
usually responsible for predation on young kiwi. Fortunately, the kiwi is less likely to
lose eggs to mammalian predators in comparison to other native birds, due to the egg’s
large size and additional parental protection (McLennan, et al., 1996).
A study undertaken at Lake Waikaremoana, between 1990 and 2005, measured the
survival rates of 53 adults and 126 juveniles North Island brown kiwi (McLennan, et al.,
2004). It showed that 5 adults were killed by ferrets, possums, and pigs. Also, a total of
35 juveniles were killed; 33 by mustelids, and one by a cat. In another North Island
brown kiwi study, 49 chicks were monitored, with 45% dying in the first 3 weeks, out of
which mustelids were responsible for 77% of the 13 confirmed deaths (McLennan, et
al., 1996).
Dogs have also played a huge part in massively reducing kiwi populations. In Waitangi
State Forest, a spate of attacks by one dog killed 500 birds in a few weeks, reducing the
local population by 50% (Overmars, 2002) (McLennan, et al., 1996) (Peat, 2006).
Between 1990 and 1995, 194 kiwi deaths were reported in Northland, with dogs
responsible for 70% of those deaths (Pierce & Sporle, 1997). It is evident from these
studies that predation has a serious impact on kiwi populations and varies significantly
with age, locality, season, species, and predator control intensity.
Furthermore, hatching success of kiwi eggs is very low due to various causes, for
example egg breakages, infertilities and microbial attacks (Sales, 2005) (Peat, 2006). A
study on kiwi survival rates in mainland forests found that 77 nesting attempts by 48
pairs of kiwi resulted in 68% of the eggs failing to hatch. The study also concluded that
the largest cause of egg failure for 83 North Island brown eggs was nest desertion
(McLennan, 1988) (McLennan, et al., 1996) (Pierce & Sporle, 1997).
In addition, the kiwi has been known to succumb to accidental deaths. The birds suffer
from accidental trapping. Between the 1930s and 1980s, hundreds were killed as a
consequence of possum control trapping, with many surviving kiwi also displaying
damaged or missing toes (Peat, 2006). Many are run over by vehicles on roads that
fragment their habitats; and some have been found to drown, despite their swimming
ability, or fall off cliffs (Pierce & Sporle, 1997). The kiwi is also vulnerable to several
avian diseases (Sales, 2005).
11
1.3 History of Kiwi Conservation
During the mid-1990s, initiatives in kiwi conservation emerged and the first mainland
island reserves were launched (Saunders & Norton, 2001). The key idea was to offer the
kiwi protection from predators in designated areas of prime habitat in the North and
South Islands (Peat, 2006). The government’s year 2000 initiative established three
kiwi sanctuaries in the North Island, and two in the South Island, with the focus on
developing methods to protect kiwi and to increase their numbers (BNZ Save the Kiwi
Trust, 2011).
By 1991, the BNZ kiwi recovery program was established to prevent the further decline
of kiwi populations. This program is a partnership between BNZ, DOC and the Royal
Forest and Bird Protection Society, with the long term goal to maintain and enhance the
current abundance, distribution and genetic diversity of kiwi (Robertson, 2003).
Additionally, there are now more than 60 community-led projects around the country.
The contributing partners have distinctive focuses regarding kiwi conservation but still
work together to achieve key conservation goals.
DOC’s main focus in kiwi conservation is to maintain and increase the current
population by (DOC, 2006):
• Undertaking predator control in kiwi habitat.
• Conducting ongoing research into genetics, breeding, habitat requirements,
monitoring techniques and pest control methods.
• Seeking help from the community and businesses, especially in areas where kiwi
are found on private land.
On the other hand, BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust was established in 2002 and is an integral
part of the national BNZ kiwi recovery program (Robertson & Colbourne, 2003). The
Trust has focused efforts in three main areas (BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust, 2010):
Raising Revenue
a) Launching new initiatives to broaden its fundraising base.
b) Additional contributions from BNZ when staff and customers purchase the
kiwi EFTPOS cards and cheque books, bringing in more than $1.5 million for
kiwi conservation since 2002.
12
Distributing Dollars
a) In 2010, $880,000 was allocated through grants to 47 projects throughout
New Zealand in predator control, kiwi monitoring and research projects.
Education and Advocacy
a) The use of various social media to increase public awareness.
b) The BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust website allows the public to log in and share
information, discuss problems and contribute ideas.
c) Advocacy material is available to people working to protect kiwi, these
include brochures, posters and Kiwi Zone signs to warn dog owners.
1.4 BNZ Operation Nest Egg and Kiwi Crèche
An efficient approach to counteract the widespread kiwi population decline was the
sanctioning of BNZ’s ONE by DOC in 1994. ONE was launched as a tool to artificially
incubate and hatch kiwi eggs (DOC, 2004), adopting a ‘production-line’ manner. This is
due to the fact that less than 5% of kiwi chicks in the first 6 months of their lives survive
to adulthood due to predation on the mainland (Colbourne, et al., 2005).
Throughout New Zealand, there are 6 captive-rearing facilities supporting ONE;
comprising of the Auckland Zoo, Rotorua’s Kiwi Encounter at Rainbow Springs, the
Whangarei Native Bird Rescue Centre, Napier's Westshore Wildlife Reserve, the
Otorohanga Kiwi House, and the Christchurch’s Willowbank Wildlife reserve (Peat,
2006). While five of these facilities concentrate their efforts on the various subspecies of
the North Island brown kiwi, the Willowbank facility is unique in that it is the only one
in the South Island and is involved in the breeding of the two most threatened taxa
(DOC, 2004): the Okarito rowi and Haast tokoeka. However, this leaves a void in the
captive management plans for the other species and subspecies, and must be addressed
immediately given the predicted decline highlighted in the 2008-2018 recovery plan
(Holzapfel, et al., 2008).
The ONE process starts in the forests where breeding kiwis are found. These adult birds
are monitored with electronic transmitters (Overmars, 2002) and once signals indicate
that the parent has left the burrow, volunteers approach the nest to recover the egg.
13
These eggs are then transported to the captive-rearing facilities where they are washed,
weighed, measured and candled to check on their fertility (Colbourne, et al., 2005).
These facilities are extremely successful as they boast a 95% survival rate for the eggs
(Peat, 2006).
Once hatched and weighing approximately 350 grams, the chicks are micro-chipped or
radio-tagged and then transferred to predator-proof areas known as kiwi crèches. In the
crèches, the chicks can be further raised to a reasonable size and weight of up to 1
kilogram before release back into the wild. At this weight range, chicks were deemed
better able to defend themselves against predators (Peat, 2006).
The ONE programme has increased the understanding of kiwi captive breeding,
husbandry and survival rates. For example, researchers are now more aware of the
importance of incubation conditions in egg and chick development. Incubations at high
temperatures were shown to create developmental problems in chicks, including
splayed feet. In contrast, eggs incubated at low temperatures can result in lethargic
embryos (Colbourne, et al., 2005).
Also, various new technologies are improved to assist the conservation efforts like the
development of a new transmitter dubbed the ‘Egg Timer’ in 2006 (Peat, 2006). This
transmitter is fitted onto the brooding kiwi and is devised to send out a slow pulse rate
when the birds are not incubating and a faster pulse rate when there are eggs under the
bird. It allows researchers to simplify egg recovery efforts and to know when eggs are
ready for collection.
Evidently, ONE has so far proven its effectiveness at sustaining kiwi recruitment, re-
establishing extinct populations, and rapidly recovering the populations of kiwi already
in serious decline. This is illustrated in the increase of up to 25% in Okarito rowi
numbers over a period of 6 years. Hence, ONE should continue as a viable and
successful tool in kiwi conservation.
14
2.0 METHODOLOGY
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
2.1 Methods Employed
The project required a firsthand approach into understanding and observing the
conservation work that is being carried out on North Island brown kiwi. Thus, three
main sites were specifically chosen to focus our study:
The Cape Kidnappers and Ocean Beach Wildlife Preserve
The Boundary Stream Mainland Island
The Opouahi Pan Pac Kiwi Crèche
All three sites are located within the Hawke’s Bay area on the eastern coast of the North
Island, New Zealand. For each site, visits were undertaken by the project group to
ensure an appropriate insight was gained on the areas. Furthermore, the kiwi
population viability and management, plus the sites’ funding and maintenance costs,
were examined.
The primary source of information was gathered through meetings with representatives
from each site. These meetings took place in the week starting from 31st January 2011
to 4th February 2011. Predetermined open-ended questions were selected; while the
question-and-answer sessions were conducted in an informal manner that allowed for
elaboration. Each meeting was roughly 30 minutes in duration.
Three separate meetings were conducted for the site at Cape Kidnappers. The
representatives were Travis Cullen, Tamsin Ward-Smith and Dr. John McLennan. For
the Boundary Stream site, a meeting was undertaken with Denise Fastier. Lastly,
questions were presented to two unnamed volunteers at the Opouahi site.
In addition, the secondary source of scientific knowledge was acquired through written
reports, journals, and books. These included information on kiwi biology and behaviour,
threats, predator control, and ONE. The DOC and BNZ Save the Kiwi websites were also
consulted to gain background on current management and conservation practices.
15
2.2 Advantages
By meeting face-to-face with the primary sources, firsthand perspectives were gathered
in their respective areas. The chosen representatives were directly involved with kiwi
conservation and have had years of experience with various aspects of management,
including breeding and predator control. The representatives were able to share their
personal views, opinions and concerns regarding kiwi conservation that might not be
available in the scientific literature. Additionally, a lot of prior conservation work has
been done, and this has resulted in a large amount of scientific publications that were
easily accessible within library collections. There was also a large amount of
information on the internet.
2.3 Disadvantages
The notable disadvantage of the study was the small number of representatives.
Although a lot of valuable information was gathered from the primary sources, this
small pool was made up of individuals within the conservation circle already involved
with pro-kiwi preservation. Hence, certain biasness may be present when expressing
their personal views and opinions. It is also recognised that statistics and figures given
by different regarding the same question tended to vary, with only approximations
given. This information had to be cross checked with literary sources. If a follow-up
study was to be undertaken, a broader representative pool should include individuals
from outside the conservation circle, such as the iwi and the general public.
2.4 Limitations
The principal limitation of the study is largely geographical. The distance of the three
study sites are hours away from Victoria University, Wellington, making any subsequent
visits to the sites after our initial trip as impractical and unlikely. Moreover, some of the
sites have limited access to the public. This limitation also extends to the
representatives. Due to the distance, demanding schedules and time constraints of the
representatives, any further information required has to be obtained through email
contact. This further restricted the verification and follow-up of certain information.
16
3.0 FOCUS SITES
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
3.1 Cape Kidnappers and Ocean Beach Wildlife Preserve
3.1.1 Layout and Initial Setup
In 2006, the Cape Kidnappers and Ocean Beach Wildlife Preserve (Figure 2) was
established to restore the area’s wildlife diversity to what it was before human arrival
(BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust, 2011). To aid in attaining this goal, a 9.6-km predator-proof
fence was completed in 2007. It transects the peninsula from Clifton to Ocean Beach,
thus creating a 2,200 hectare preserve with 17 hectares of coastline, making it the
largest privately owned and funded conservation project in New Zealand (Cullen, 2011).
It is also unique as the site is a fully functioning sheep and beef farm, a tourist resort,
and an internationally renowned golf course.
Figure 2. Map of Cape
Kidnappers and Ocean
Beach Wildlife Preserve
showing the various
conservation initiatives
currently on site.
17
To create a safe environment in which to return endemic species, an eradication project
was undertaken by setting up a 100 x 100 metre baiting station grid within the preserve
(Cullen, 2011). Predators specifically targeted include cats, mustelids and rodents.
Previous intensive poisoning by the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council had already
eliminated possums from the preserve. This is an ongoing project, designed to maintain
minimal numbers of rodents in the preserve. However, there is no continued
monitoring system in place to detect invasions of predators. Overall, 120 specialised
feline traps are in place, as well as 1200 tunnel traps for mustelids (Cullen, 2011).
This exclusion fence is a ‘leaky system’ as it is not completely predator-proof. The fence
excludes all mammalian pests except for smaller mice, but there are three weak points
(Ward-Smith, 2011). The fence ends above the beach at both ends, making it possible
for predators such as cats and mustelids to walk around the ends and into the preserve.
The main gate into the preserve is also not predator-proof, as the private owners
believe that farming and resort operations would be adversely affected by the presence
of a large pest-proof gate (Cullen, 2011). To control this issue, there is a high density of
traps around these three weak points, both inside and outside the preserve in an
attempt to catch all pests before they can get into the preserve.
3.1.2 Return of the Kiwi
Reintroductions of North Island brown kiwi started in August 2008. Five individuals
were released into the preserve, and were tracked using radio transmitters. One female
was sourced from the Ruahine Forest Park in Central Hawke’s Bay, and was reared at
Kiwi Encounter in Rotorua as a part of ONE. The other four were all taken from the
Maungataniwha Forest, then hatched and reared in the Napier City Council’s breeding
facilities (BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust, 2011). Since then, 70 more have been released into
the preserve. Thirteen have died from various causes, such as falling off the steep cliffs,
accidental drowning and diseases (Ward-Smith, 2011). These birds were sourced from
the Kaweka, Maungataniwha and Ruahine ranges. No natural breeding has taken place
as yet, as it takes approximately 3 years for the juveniles to reach maturity. The target
for the preserve is to have a large enough breeding population so that they can release
excess birds back into their source populations (McLennan, 2011).
18
3.1.3 Funding and Costs
Innovative new ways of capitalising on the Cape’s unique landscape and wildlife have
been created to help fund this project. Ecotourism attractions are widely publicised to
generate income to pay for the conservation side of the operations. These include tours
throughout the preserve, and a golf course with luxury accommodation. The biggest
appeal is the chance to see a kiwi in the wild, with lodge guests having a chance to track
kiwi on guided tours. The ‘Kiwi Discovery Walk’ costs $550 per night and half of the
generated income is channelled into the cape’s kiwi conservation program (McLennan,
2011). The money is used to radio tag and monitor breeding adult kiwi in the Kaweka
Ranges, where the birds are sourced. It contributes to egg and chick extraction and
transportation costs from the ranges, as well as radio tagging and monitoring once
inside the preserve. Estimated costs incurred are around $3,000 to $7,000 per chick
(Ward-Smith, 2011). As well as this income, the preserve receives $500,000 per year
from the BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust.
3.2 Boundary Stream Mainland Island
3.2.1 Past and Current Management
The Boundary Stream Mainland Island is an 800 hectare fragment of native forest, with
no fencing, situated on the eastern side of the Maungaharuru Range (Figure 3). Habitat
destruction and pests destroyed most of the forest and wildlife in the area. In 1979, the
area was turned into a reserve called Boundary Stream Scenic Reserve and was
managed by the Department of Land and Survey until DOC took over the management.
The mainland island is entirely funded and managed by DOC (Saunders & Norton,
2001), and was established in 1996 as a nature restoration project (DOC, 2011). The
management strategies for the site include:
Pest control and monitoring of forest health.
Re-establishing native flora and fauna.
Scientific research.
Maintaining and upgrading recreational facilities.
Providing interpretation and publication of any information and data collected.
19
Figure 3. Map of Boundary Stream Mainland Island, Hawke’s Bay region (DOC, 2011).
3.2.2 Predator Control
Five DOC staff members manage the area and implement a number of techniques to
control pests. Bigger species like goats, deer and pigs are shot on sight, both inside and
outside the reserve. Possums, rodents and mustelids are controlled through traps and
poisoning. There are currently 943 bait stations over 87 kilometres of track, which are
rebaited every 2 months. The poison ‘Diphacinone’ is used in these stations in the form
of bait pellets. Fenn traps have also been placed around the area to kill mustelids and
cats (Fastier, 2011).
20
Without a predator-proof fence, pests will always be an ongoing problem as there is a
continuous inflow from surrounding private farmland. Between August 1996 and June
2008, a total of 782 cats, 897 stoats, 340 weasels and 156 ferrets were killed. Despite
this, ferret numbers in particular are still rising (Fastier, 2011). However, the control of
pests at the low levels has allowed for the re-establishment of native flora and fauna.
3.2.3 Reintroductions of the Kiwi
From 2000 to 2007, the North Island brown kiwi was released into Boundary Stream.
Thirty-eight of the released birds originated from the Kaweka Forest Park and one other
was from Willow Flat. Since 2004, 43 chicks have hatched on site as a result of these
translocations. Since this population was established, various causes of mortality have
been identified; 29% due to predation, 8% due to drowning and walking off cliffs, 2%
due to disease, and 5% were of unknown causes. Another 6% have been released back
into the Kaweka Forest Park, and 2% dispersed elsewhere (Fastier, 2011).
Using ONE, DOC hoped to increase the survival rate of kiwi chicks at the site to
approximately 20%, and since 2004 this target has been maintained at an average of
56% per year. Also, through call count surveys, monitoring has shown that kiwi calls
have been on the rise since 2005 (Fastier, 2011). Since April 2008, chicks from
Boundary Stream and Kaweka Forest Park have been raised in the newly developed
Opouahi Pan Pac Kiwi Crèche, a short distance from Boundary Stream Mainland Island
(DOC, 2011).
3.3 Opouahi Pan Pac Kiwi Crèche
In consultation with Dr. John McLennan, the newly formed Environment, Conservation
and Outdoor Education Trust (ECOED) decided it was more cost effective to put funds
into ONE rather than predator eradication, provided there was a pest proof area to keep
the birds safe. Hence in April 2008, the first kiwi crèche in the Hawke’s Bay area was
opened at the 40 hectare Lake Opouahi Scenic Reserve (BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust, 2011)
(Figure 4).
21
The crèche surrounds Lake Opouahi and is protected by a 3.3-km long, 2-metre high
predator-proof fence. The crèche has the capacity to raise 30 chicks at any one time and
is used specifically to increase North Island brown kiwi populations in the Hawke’s Bay.
Figure 4. Map showing the location of Opouahi Pan Pac Kiwi Crèche.
The biggest challenge for the Opouahi crèche is to minimise the dangers posed by
stoats, ferrets and dogs. After the predator-proof fence was built, an intensive trapping
regime was used to completely free the site of any predators. The reserve is now mostly
predator-free; however, mice are still a problem. Although mice are too small to prey on
kiwi, they compete for food sources which the kiwi prey upon.
Additionally, alarm systems on the fence surrounding the site will trigger if trees fall
and penetrate the fencing, as this will provide holes for predators to breach the reserve.
These precautionary measures are taken because winds can get up to 160-km per hour
around the reserve.
22
On average it costs approximately $2,000 to raise chicks to the desired size, and is a lot
less labour intensive or intrusive on the chicks than captive breeding. The funding for
the work done is supported by the following governmental and private organisations:
• BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust.
• Department of Conservation.
• Pan Pac Forest Products Limited.
• Eastern and Central Community.
• Hawke’s Bay Regional Council.
• Endeavour Community Trust.
• Infinity Foundation Limited.
• Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society.
• Kiwi Encounter Rainbow Springs.
• Hawke’s Bay Proteins.
• Birdwoods Gallery.
• Landcorp Farming Limited.
Since 2008, 84 individuals have been returned to the wild, with a survival success rate
of 66%. These releases were to the Boundary Stream Mainland Island, the Kaweka
Forest Park, and the Cape Kidnappers and Ocean Beach Wildlife Preserve (BNZ Save the
Kiwi Trust, 2011).
23
4.0 DISCUSSION
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
4.1 Population Dynamics and Viability
All kiwi species are in overall decline (Holzapfel, et al., 2008). Their populations are
generally small and isolated, with many threatened with extinction. The key target in
kiwi conservation is to achieve a minimum of 500 effective breeding pairs for all
populations, which assumes a population size of around 1500 individuals, for their long-
term continuity (Peat, 2006).
The more threatened kiwi species, like the Okarito rowi and the Haast tokoeka, have a
smaller target of 300 effective breeding pairs (Peat, 2006). Northland and western races
of the North Island brown kiwi and the Stewart Island tokoeka are considered to have
already reached this target in certain protected areas (Holzapfel, et al., 2008). In order
for the other species to reach their targets and increase kiwi population viability,
predation, habitat loss and fragmentation must be understood and mitigated.
4.1.1 Predation Risks
Studies on survival rates of kiwi have shown the substantial cause of loss by predation
(McLennan, et al., 2004). It is evident that vulnerability of kiwi to predators changes
throughout their lives, and different predators pose different risks at different life
stages. Adult mortality rates appear much lower than those of juveniles. It has been
calculated that approximately 95% of juveniles will not reach adulthood in unmanaged
populations (Basse & McLennan, 2003).
The study undertaken at Waikaremoana examined the predation risks of North Island
brown kiwi in seven different age classes (McLennan, et al., 2004). The study showed
that dependent chicks had a relatively low predation risk (0.18% to 0.51% a day) due to
being less active and protected by the brooding male. Once independent, predation risk
increased to 70% and remained high until 90 days. Predation risk declined sharply
proceeding day 90, and by day 130 had reached 0.0008%, similar to that of adults.
24
These results highlight that slow juvenile growth is the main reason North Island brown
kiwi fail in the presence of uncontrolled predator populations.
Once they reach a weight of approximately 800 to 1,000 grams, they are considered safe
and are able to better protect themselves (Peat, 2006). However, this does not denote a
zero predation risk, with evidence of kiwi up to 1,160 grams still being attacked by
stoats. The little spotted kiwi take up to 309 days to reach a ‘safe-size’ compared to 110
days for the North Island brown kiwi (McLennan, et al., 2004). This extra 199 days of
exposure to predators is highly significant, and likely played a part in the extinction of
little spotted kiwi on the mainland.
This brief period of juvenile vulnerability is causing the large majority of declines in
populations. Removal of kiwi during this vulnerable stage of life and returning them to
predator managed sites is the main objective behind ONE. Subsequently, to achieve
population stability, predation levels have to decrease substantially, and juvenile
recruitment has to increase by 20% if populations are to recover, depending on the
species (Basse & McLennan, 2003).
4.1.2 Reserve Size and Habitat Fragmentation
The aim of protected areas is to retain small populations of kiwi until predators can be
eliminated or controlled over large areas (Basse & McLennan, 2003). These areas must
be large enough to ensure the long-term persistence and viability of the kiwi. Six million
hectares are currently occupied by kiwi, of which only 2% are managed (Peat, 2006).
These areas need to be a large enough size to accommodate sub-adult dispersal and
viability needs.
Two different studies, one which used a simulation and one which used a mathematical
matrix model, analysed the relationship between managed areas, dispersal, and
population viability. Results of both studies were very similar, and suggested that the
size of protected habitat required for population viability increased as average dispersal
distance increased. For an average dispersal distance of 5.24-km, a minimum managed
area of approximately 11,000 hectares is suggested (Basse & McLennan, 2003)
(Westbrooke, 2007).
25
This area could potentially contain 3300 adults at carrying capacity, which would likely
be an adequate population size in obtaining the goal of 500 effective breeding pairs
(Basse & McLennan, 2003). These simulations and models, although helpful, assume
that these exact dispersal patterns and average distances would have to occur to obtain
these results in reality. They also do not take into account density dependence, which
could significantly affect dispersal due to kiwi being very territorial.
Unfortunately, the sizes of managed areas that these simulations did suggest are never
likely to occur, especially in the North Island, due to the loss and fragmentation of kiwi
habitat. The results given would also indicate that all of the official mainland islands in
New Zealand are too small for viable kiwi populations (Basse & McLennan, 2003).
McLennan also estimated that reserve sizes in the North Island need to be within 7,500
and 15,000 hectares, which would make most reserves, including the Boundary Stream
site at 800 hectares, with trapping occurring over an additional 2,200 hectares, too
small (Potter, 1990).
In the event of limited or no dispersal, comparable to reserves with predator-proof
fences, populations are said to maintain viability, at least until they reach their carrying
capacity (Basse & McLennan, 2003). It has been suggested that when reserves reach
carrying capacity, the juveniles can be transferred to other mainland areas where kiwi
populations are struggling or have gone extinct. This process has been titled ‘kiwi
farming’ (Peat, 2006) and would help in restocking populations and increasing effective
population sizes. Cape Kidnappers has the potential to ‘farm’ kiwi if population goals are
achieved.
The fragmentation of kiwi habitat affects dispersal and consequently the probability of
re-colonisation of areas after extinction (Potter, 1990). This emphasises the potential of
connecting forest remnants in order to allow dispersal, increase migration, and increase
viable populations of kiwi.
A study undertaken in Paerata on the use of forest remnants by kiwi outside a reserve
highlighted how much time kiwi would spend outside a reserve and how far the birds
would travel (Potter, 1990). The kiwi spent 25% of their time in forest remnants on
farmlands adjacent to the reserve. The average distance of pasture crossed by kiwi to
get to the remnants was 550 metres, and the farthest travelled was 1,200 metres.
26
This investigation on habitat use by kiwi outside protected areas in a fragmented
landscape emphasised the need to increase and enhance kiwi habitats, and the effective
population sizes within them, by linking habitats together and creating ‘stepping stones’
or corridors for kiwi throughout New Zealand.
4.2 Phylogenetic Variation and Management
In today’s context, phylogenetics and conservation biology are two fast-growing fields
of biology. In the past, even though phylogenetics has been an influence on conservation
biology, there has been little synergy between the two (Purvis, Gittleman, & Brooks,
2005). However, this is slowly addressed as the importance of genetic management is
fully appreciated and understood for long term continuity of any species (Overmars,
2002).
Habitat loss, fragmentation and population bottlenecks are major aspects in the
diminishing long term health and viability of kiwi genetic management and phylogeny
(Smith, Keller, Marr, & Arcese, 2006). Concerns for isolated populations include the
potential of inbreeding as recruitment and dispersal of sub-adult and juvenile kiwi is
restricted (Landweber & Dobson, 1999). This tends to produce offspring with reduced
fitness over many generations (Smith, Keller, Marr, & Arcese, 2006). Furthermore, it
also heightens the risk of diseases that may afflict genetically similar individuals within
a population, leading to potential local extirpations (Jamieson, Wallis, & Briskie, 2006).
Inbreeding is already evident in the Boundary Stream site as two pairs of same sibling
pairings have been found (Fastier, 2011).
Currently, Rainbow Spring’s Kiwi Encounter is the forerunner in ONE’s operations. Kiwi
eggs that go through this site for artificial incubation come from many areas in the
North Island, including Coromandel, Tongariro, Taranaki, Wanganui, Whakatane,
Whirinaki and Hawke’s Bay (Peat, 2006).
These areas represent localities where all four distinct taxa of the North Island brown
kiwi are known to exist. Although current procedures insist on the detailing of the kiwi’s
origins, not enough work has been done on the genetic makeup of the birds involved
(Burbidge, Colbourne, Robertson, & Baker, 2003).
27
It is evident that errors have been made during pre-1990s kiwi management. Between
the 1970s and early 1980s, genetically different Northland birds have been translocated
to the Hawke’s Bay and Waikato regions (Burbidge, Colbourne, Robertson, & Baker,
2003). These initial translocations may have already affected the genetic makeup of
those populations and resulted in hybrid birds.
Some sceptics may argue over the fact that in certain isolated populations, low genetic
diversity and suspected inbreeding depression might warrant the existence and
creation of hybrid populations, as can be seen in the conservation management of the
Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi) (Smith, Keller, Marr, & Arcese, 2006). Recently,
decisions were made to introduce a few individual Texas panthers (P. c. stanleyana) to
enhance the dwindling genetic pool of the Florida panthers (Caso, et al., 2008). The
argument made was, ‘We can either have the Florida panther, or we can have panthers
in Florida’ (Bowen, 1999).
Nonetheless, this does not suggest that the same conservation plan is to be taken in New
Zealand’s kiwi management. It must be highlighted that the provocative measure was
taken only after weighing in the fact that the Florida population was down to only 80
individual animals and was unable to sustain itself naturally (Bowen, 1999). To date, all
kiwi species in New Zealand are still in their thousands, with the exception of the
Okarito rowi and Haast tokoeka (Holzapfel, et al., 2008), and have enough breeding
adults to maintain genetic variance (McLennan & McCann, 2002) and to not justify any
hybridisations.
Even though small levels of hybridisation do occur naturally in the wild, these cases are
few and may not threaten the overall demographic stability of a species. Moreover,
Landweber and Dobson (1999) argue that long term interspecific hybridisation can
destroy the species’ genetic integrity. Likewise, intraspecific hybridisation can also
create maladaptive effects by eroding the genetic basis of adaptations to local
environmental conditions.
Furthermore, the mixing of genes from different taxa can lead to the lost of genetic
variance in unique populations. This is called gene swamping (Smith, Keller, Marr, &
Arcese, 2006).
28
Again using the Florida panther as an example, by 2001, it was proven that genes from
the introduced Texas panthers had exceeded 24% in the Florida panther gene pool.
Hence, progressive gene swamping might ultimately eliminate the Florida genome
(Smith, Keller, Marr, & Arcese, 2006). Given this outcome, kiwi conservation
management must consider the significance of gene swamping in translocation and
breeding programmes set up for the four North Island brown kiwi taxa.
Consequently, Smith, Keller, Marr and Arcese (2006) suggest six proposals when
contemplating translocation or captive breeding:
Gene pools should be mixed only if considerable inbreeding depression has been
verified in the target populace.
Source and target populations should live in similar habitats and show
comparable adaptive traits.
Tests of hybridisation consequences should be conducted before any mixing.
Translocated individuals should be marked and genotyped and their genetic
contributions to future generations should be reviewed.
Migrants to a target population should be set at 1-10 per generation.
Corrective action should be planned in the event that gene flow exceeds target
levels.
These proposals must be factored in and taken into account when dealing with kiwi
recovery plans. Correspondingly, if errors in the genetic makeup of existing kiwi
populations are not identified earlier, conservation funds may be squandered on
conserving a genetically unsustainable population or a population of hybrids (Bowen,
1999) (Purvis, Gittleman, & Brooks, 2005). The funds should instead be routed to
projects that deal with genetically pure birds.
29
4.3 Cost Effectiveness
The main concern regarding kiwi funding is deciding where to direct the large majority
of the available kiwi conservation resources and grants; that is either towards ONE and
crèching or in the direction of predator control.
The current cost of raising a kiwi chick at the Opouahi Pan Pac Kiwi Crèche is roughly
$2,000 per chick, with transmitter costs adding an additional $350. In addition, 18
males are currently monitored in the Kaweka Ranges as part of ONE, and the cost of
attaching a transmitter onto each adult kiwi is estimated at $800 per bird, equal to a
$14,400 total. There is also the initial cost of $8 million for the predator-proof fence,
which requires replacement every 20 years. Moreover, predator control at a fenced site
still cost approximately $75 per hectare annually (Clapperton & Day, 2001). Hence, for a
40 hectare area like the Opouahi crèche, this can be up to $3,000.
Therefore, an overall expenditure of approximately $487,900 per year is estimated for
the Opouahi Pan Pac Kiwi Crèche; with costs covering maintenance of the crèche, the
location and extraction of kiwi chicks from the Kaweka Ranges, rearing them, and
returning them to managed populations. This crèche process results in a success rate of
66% for chicks reintroduced into the wild, as prior mentioned.
For an ideal population size in the wild, in order to get the same success rate, all pests
would have to be controlled in all areas containing wild kiwi populations. This is
because the presence of any pests reduces the survival rate of juvenile kiwi to 5%. Thus
thousands of hectares of native forests would have to be intensively poisoned and
managed. With a cost of $135 per hectare per annum of predator control, it would cost
approximately $1,485,000 to manage an area of 11,000 hectares, which is the
recommended reserve size to maintain a viable population of kiwi. Besides, current pest
management practices do not ensure 100% pest eradication, and further research into
the development and cost effectiveness of these practices is needed.
As a result of this analysis, it is currently more viable and cost effective to undertake the
approach of ONE and crèche alongside predator control, compared to focusing all
resources on intensive predator management of larger areas (>11,000 hectares) until at
least better predator control practices emerge.
30
4.4 International vs. Local Conservation Approaches
The kiwi is an iconic species for New Zealand. Likewise, the Giant Panda (Ailuropoda
melanoleuca) is China’s national and cultural emblem (BBC News World, 2011). Both
species have drawn large amounts of conservation efforts and attention within their
own countries. However, the giant panda is benefiting more from a higher international
awareness compared to the kiwi, which further increases funding and support for
panda conservation. The major reasons that contribute to this difference are identified
as overall worldwide perception and commercial symbolic value, as well as the
involvement of media and political agendas. These are factors that are rarely applied
into kiwi conservation initiatives and are potentially impeding the kiwi’s reach onto the
global stage.
The giant panda’s physical and visual characteristics are reminiscent of ‘cuteness’ in
babies and are able to elicit certain social and psychological appeal from humans (BBC
News World, 2011). This is described as neoteny, in which adults of a species retain
particular physical traits previously seen only in juveniles. Illustrations of giant pandas
in the media are frequently larger than life and play on the features aforementioned
(Warren, 2006). As such, this advantage has been used as a marketing ploy to project
panda conservation into the international community. The commercial value of giant
pandas, both intentional and unintentional, contributes to increasing international
awareness of giant pandas and their conservation.
Moreover, as giant pandas represent the nation of China, the animals were used as
diplomatic gifts by China to other countries to improve or maintain the countries’
political relations between 1958 and 1982. These gifts have created a practice dubbed
as ‘panda diplomacy’ (Lu, Wang, & Garshelis, 2008).
However, by 1984, the giant pandas were no longer viewed as just agents of diplomacy
but are currently offered to other nations only on 10-year loans with a per annum fee.
The money generated from these loans is routed back to giant panda conservation in
China (Warren, 2006); from installing communications networks in reserves, creating
environmental education programs, analysing genetic diversity, and developing plans to
restore habitats.
31
All these factors not only independently influence international awareness of giant
panda conservation, but are also correlated with each other (Figure 5). However,
regardless of the success in giant panda captive breeding, it still remains to see whether
the measures taken will influence the population in the wild, as large enough wilderness
areas in China are scarce, and reintroductions back into the wild might not be viable.
Figure 5. Different factors correlate to influence giant panda conservation.
Conversely, the kiwi’s lacklustre characteristics make for difficult marketing ploys and
commercialisation, even with high levels of local enthusiasm (Robertson, 2003).
However, this is only a minor setback as there is much potential to be learnt from the
giant panda’s conservation example, which can be adapted to meet local priorities.
Comparably, both species have neoteny-like features and both have the ability to garner
global community interest. This can be seen in the attention some foreign zoos place on
their existing birds. For example, in 2008, the latest hatching of a kiwi chick at the
Smithsonian National Zoo in Washington earned enough interest to receive media
coverage and the instalment of a webcam in its enclosure so that the public can monitor
its progress (The Dominion Post, 2008).
32
Additionally, even though the estimated number of giant pandas in the world is fewer
compared to kiwi, China is still willing to send individual animals overseas for breeding
purposes. Hence, the perception of keeping kiwi strictly within the New Zealand domain
must change. As the most numerous kiwi species, more pairs of North Island brown
kiwi should be offered to international zoos with the proper facilities to house them
(BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust, 2010). If there are concerns over losing genetically viable
individuals that might instead contribute to local gene pools, hybrid birds which are not
participating in the breeding programme can be used as an alternative.
The captive kiwi can present opportunities for research that might provide new
information and technologies capable of enhancing local population management. These
individual birds can also act as living ambassadors to the global community in educating
the public. In turn, this raises the long term possibility of increasing worldwide
awareness on the plight of the kiwi in New Zealand, and boosting international funding
and financial support from interested parties.
33
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Continue to present information on plight of the kiwi and how locals can help.
For example, advocacy on proper dog handling in the wild, and highlighting
juvenile vulnerability as the greatest threat to kiwi.
Ensure that unfenced reserves take into account both dispersal and territorial
behaviour when managing kiwi populations.
Work towards increasing forest remnants and corridors between kiwi areas to
allow movement between populations.
As the populations of kiwi are still small within all three focus sites, genetic
testings and DNA charting must be done on existing birds.
Any ascertained hybrids in the breeding population must be separated and
phased out. The potential to send these hybrid birds overseas as ‘conservation
ambassadors’ should be recognised.
Initiate selective breeding to optimise gene pool diversity, particularly in the
most threatened kiwi species like the Okarito rowi and Haast tokoeka.
Periodically introduce new individuals from applicable wild localities into the
three focus sites to boost localised genetic variability.
Genetic makeup in the captive birds must be established before surplus birds are
released back into the wild.
Opportunities to increase captive breeding, scientific knowledge and financial
support of kiwi internationally must be made available.
Improve the potential to tap into ‘kiwi diplomacy’.
34
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
We would like to thank the following persons for their invaluable comments, and whose
support was greatly appreciated.
Dr. Nicola Nelson, Senior Lecturer, School of Biological Sciences, Victoria
University
Dr. John McLennan, Scientific Advisor
Tamsin Ward-Smith, Preserve Manager, Cape Kidnappers and Ocean Beach
Wildlife Preserve
Travis Cullen, Predator Controller, Cape Kidnappers and Ocean Beach Wildlife
Preserve
Denise Fastier, Team Leader, Boundary Stream Mainland Island
Also, we would like to express gratitude for the assistance from all the kiwi
conservation volunteers that we have interacted with.
35
REFERENCES
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Basse, B., & McLennan, J. (2003). Protected areas for kiwi in mainland forests of New Zealand: how
large should they be? New Zealand Journal of Ecology, Vol. 27, No. 2 , 95-105.
Bassett, S. M., McLennan, J. A., & Blackwell, G. L. (2005). The biology & conservation status of the
brown kiwi. Proceedings of the 3rd International Ratite Science Symposium of the World's Poultry
Science Association (WPSA) & 12th World Ostrich Congress, (pp. 165-169). Madrid, Spain.
BBC News World. (2011, January 11). Why do we love pandas? Retrieved March 7, 2011, from BBC
News World: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12160538
BirdLife International. (2008). Apteryx australis. Retrieved March 12, 2011, from IUCN 2010 Red List
of Threatened Species: http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/141092/0
BirdLife International. (2008). Apteryx haastii. Retrieved March 12, 2011, from IUCN 2010 Red List of
Threatened Species: http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/141094/0
BirdLife International. (2008). Apteryx mantelli. Retrieved March 12, 2011, from IUCN 2010 Red List
of Threatened Species: http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/150471/0
BirdLife International. (2008). Apteryx owenii. Retrieved March 12, 2011, from IUCN 2010 Red List of
Threatened Species: http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/141093/0
BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust. (2010). Annual Review 2010. Auckland: Bank of New Zealand.
BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust. (2011). Cape Kidnappers & Ocean Beach. Retrieved March 3, 2011, from
Kiwis Saving Kiwi: Community Efforts: http://www.savethekiwi.org.nz/kiwi-saving-kiwi/community-
efforts/cape-kidnappers-a-ocean-beach.html
BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust. (2011). ECOED. Retrieved March 3, 2011, from Kiwis Saving Kiwi:
Community Efforts: http://www.savethekiwi.org.nz/kiwi-saving-kiwi/community-efforts/ecoed.html
BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust. (2011). Kiwi Sanctuaries. Retrieved March 3, 2011, from Kiwis Saving Kiwi:
Kiwi Sanctuaries: http://www.savethekiwi.org.nz/kiwi-saving-kiwi/kiwi-sanctuaries/kiwi-
sanctuaries.html
Bowen, B. (1999). Preserving genes, species, or ecosystems? Healing the fractured foundations of
conservation policy. Molecular Ecology, 8 , 5-10.
Burbidge, M., Colbourne, R., Robertson, H., & Baker, A. (2003). Molecular & other biological
evidence supports the recognition of at least three species of brown kiwi. Conservation Genetics ,
167-177.
Caso, A., Lopez-Gonzalez, C., Payan, E., Eizirik, E., de Oliverira, T., Leite-Pitman, R., et al. (2008).
Puma concolor. Retrieved March 12, 2011, from IUCN 2010 Red List of Threatened Species:
http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/18868/0
36
Clapperton, B., & Day, T. (2001). Cost-effectiveness of exclusion fencing for stoat and other pest
control compared with conventional control. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Conservation.
Colbourne, R. (2002). Incubation behaviour & egg physiology of kiwi (Apteryx spp.) in natural
habitats. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, Vol. 26, No. 2 , 129-138.
Colbourne, R., Bassett, S., Billing, T., McCormick, H., McLennan, J., Nelson, A., et al. (2005). The
development of Operation Nest Egg as a tool in the conservation management of kiwi. Science for
Conservation 259. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Conservation.
Cullen, T. (2011, January 31). Personal communication: Pest control in Cape Kidnappers & Ocean
Beach Wildlife Preserve. (J. Keast, T. Kelly, H. Moorhouse, J. Tan, & S. Wei, Interviewers)
DOC. (2011). Boundary Stream Mainland Island. Retrieved March 3, 2011, from Conservation:
Mainland Islands A-Z: http://www.doc.govt.nz/conservation/land-and-freshwater/land/mainland-
islands-a-z/boundary-stream/
DOC. (2004). Captive management plan for kiwi: Apteryx mantelli, Apteryx rowi, Apteryx australis,
Apteryx australis 'Haast', Apteryx haastii, Apteryx owenii. Threatened Species Occasional Publication
24. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Conservation.
DOC. (2006). Saving Our Kiwi. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Conservation.
Fastier, D. (2011, February 3). Personal communication: Kiwi conservation in Boundary Stream
Mainland Island. (J. Keast, T. Kelly, H. Moorhouse, J. Tan, & S. Wei, Interviewers)
Holzapfel, S., Robertson, H., McLennan, J., Sporle, W., Hackwell, K., & Impey, M. (2008). Kiwi
(Apteryx spp.) recovery plan 2008-2018. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Conservation.
Jamieson, I., Wallis, G., & Briskie, J. (2006). Inbreeding & Endangered Species Management: Is New
Zealand Out of Step with the Rest of the World? Conservation Biology, Vol. 20, No. 1 , 38-47.
Landweber, L., & Dobson, A. (1999). Genetics & the Extinction of Species. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Lu, Z., Wang, D., & Garshelis, D. (2008). Ailuropoda melanoleuca. Retrieved March 12, 2011, from
IUCN 2010 Red List of Threatened Species: http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/712/0
McLennan, J. (1988). Breeding of North Island Brown Kiwi, Apteryx australis mantelli, in Hawke's Bay,
New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, Vol. 11 , 89-97.
McLennan, J. (2011, February 3). Personal communication: Kiwi conservation in New Zealand. (J.
Keast, T. Kelly, H. Moorhouse, J. Tan, & S. Wei, Interviewers)
McLennan, J., & McCann, T. (2002). Genetic variability, distribution & abundance of great spotted
kiwi (Apteryx haastii). Science & Research Internal Report 191 , 35-56.
McLennan, J., & Potter, M. (1992). Distribution, Population Changes & Management of Brown Kiwi in
Hawke's Bay. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, Vol. 16, No. 2 , 91-102.
37
McLennan, J., Dew, L., Miles, J., Gillingham, N., & Waiwai, R. (2004). Size matters: predation risk &
juvenile growth in North Island brown kiwi (Apteryx mantelli). New Zealand Journal of Ecology, Vol.
28, No. 2 , 241-250.
McLennan, J., Potter, M., Robertson, H., Wake, G., Colbourne, R., Dew, L., et al. (1996). Role of
predation in the decline of Kiwi, Apteryx spp., in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, Vol.
20, No. 1 , 27-35.
McLennan, J., Rudge, M., & Potter, M. (1987). Range size & denning behaviour of brown kiwi,
Apteryx australis mantelli, in Hawke's Bay, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, Vol. 10 ,
97-107.
Murphy, E., Maddigan, F., Edwards, B., & Clapperton, K. (2008). Diet of stoats at Okarito Kiwi
Sanctuary, South Westland, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, Vol. 32, No. 1 , 41-45.
Overmars, F. (2002). Some early 1990s studies in kiwi (Apteryx spp.) genetics & management. Science
& Research Internal Report 191. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Conservation.
Peat, N. (2006). Kiwi: The People's Bird. Christchurch: Otago University Press.
Pierce, R., & Sporle, W. (1997). Causes of kiwi mortality in Northland. Conservation Advisory Science
Notes No. 169. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Conservation.
Potter, M. (1990). Movement of North Island Brown Kiwi (Apteryx australis mantelli) between forest
remnants. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, Vol. 14 , 17-24.
Purvis, A., Gittleman, J., & Brooks, T. (2005). Phylogeny & Conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Robertson, H. (2003). Kiwi (Apteryx spp.) recovery plan 1996-2006. Wellington: New Zealand
Department of Conservation.
Robertson, H., & Colbourne, R. (2003). Kiwi (Apteryx spp.) Best Practice Manual. Wellington: New
Zealand Department of Conservation.
Robertson, H., Colbourne, R., Graham, P., Miller, P., & Pierce, R. (2010). Experimental management
of Brown Kiwi (Apteryx mantelli) in central Northland, New Zealand. Bird Conservation International ,
1-14.
Robertson, H., Colbourne, R., Graham, P., Miller, P., & Pierce, R. (1999). Survival of Brown Kiwi
(Apteryx mantelli) exposed to Brodifacoum poison in Northland, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal
of Ecology, Vol. 23, No. 2 , 225-231.
Sales, J. (2005). The endangered kiwi: a review. Folia Zool., Vol. 54, No. 1-2 , 1-20.
Saunders, A., & Norton, D. (2001). Ecological restoration at Mainland Islands in New Zealand.
Biological Conservation 99 , 109-119.
Smith, J., Keller, L., Marr, A., & Arcese, P. (2006). Conservation Biology of Small Populations. New
York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
38
The Dominion Post. (2008, March 14). Born in the USA - a kiwi destined for life in spotlight. Retrieved
March 8, 2011, from The Dominion Post: http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/315806
Ward-Smith, T. (2011, February 1). Personal communication: Kiwi conservation in Cape Kidnappers &
Ocean Beach Wildlife Preserve. (J. Keast, T. Kelly, H. Moorhouse, J. Tan, & S. Wei, Interviewers)
Warren, L. (2006, July). Panda, Inc. National Geographic Magazine .
Westbrooke, I. (2007). How large a managed area is needed to protect a threatened animal species?
Combining simple dispersal and population models. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, Vol. 31, No. 2 ,
154-159.
39
APPENDICES
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix 1.
NORTH ISLAND BROWN KIWI (Apteryx mantelli)
Taxon: Northland, Coromandel, Eastern, and Western
Location: Northland – north of about Whangarei; Coromandel – Coromandel Peninsula;
Eastern – Hawke’s Bay, Urewera, Bay of Plenty; Western – Wanganui, Taranaki, Tongariro,
King Country, Waikato
Population size: Most widespread and numerous; >30,000 individuals
Adult size: Females – 2.3 kg, Males – 1.9 kg; about 40 cm high
Colour: Reddish brown to dark brown
Habitat: Plantation forests, scrub, pasture or rough farmland
Incubation: Lasts 75-84 days, carried out by males except in the first week – 2.5 months
Leaves nest: chicks leave nest at one week of age, returning daily up to 6 weeks, and
leaving the parental territory at 6-9 weeks
Status: Endangered; declining overall despite increases in managed populations.
(BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust, 2011)
40
Appendix 2.
OKARITO BROWN KIWI / ROWI (Apteryx rowi)
Location: Okarito and Waihou Rivers in Westland National Park; Blumine Island
Population size: Few hundred
Adult size: Slightly smaller than the North Island brown kiwi
Colour: Brown with grey tinges to plumage, sometime with white facial feathers
Habitat: Restricted to the Okarito forest on the West Coast of New Zealand's South Island
Incubation: 75-85 days; male and female share incubation
Leaves nest: Chicks leave nest at 1 week, remain in the parental territory for 6 months to
several years
Status: Critically Endangered
(BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust, 2011)
41
Appendix 3.
SOUTHERN TOKOEKA (Apteryx australis)
Taxon: Haast, Stewart Island, Northern Fiordland, Southern Fiordland
Location: Haast region of South Westland; Stewart Island; Northern and Southern Fiordland
Population size: Haast – 300 individuals; Stewart Island – 20,000 individuals; Northern
Fiordland – 10,000 individuals; Southern Fiordland – 5,000 individuals
Adult size: Length 45-55 cm; Females – 2.1-3.9 kg, Males – 1.6-2.8 kg
Colour: Reddish brown to dark brown
Habitat: Low alpine tussock grasslands between 100 and 1500 m above sea level; often
inaccessible mountainous land
Incubation: 75-85 days; male and female share incubation
Leaves nest: Chicks leave nest at 1 week, remaining in parental territory for up to 7 years
Status: Vulnerable; however Haast tokoeka – Critically endangered, reproductive rate lowest
for all kiwi
(BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust, 2011)
42
Appendix 4.
GREAT SPOTTED KIWI (Apteryx haastii)
Location: Northwest Nelson, Paparoa Range, Arthur’s Pass, and the Hurunui area of North
Canterbury
Population size: 20,000 individuals
Adult size: Largest of the kiwi; 45-50 cm tall; Females – 1.5-3.3 kg, Males – 1.2-2.6 kg
Colour: Mottled grey
Habitat: Upland and lowland areas (jungle-dense and sub-tropical looking rainforest); snow
and frost common
Incubation: 75-85 days; male and female share incubation
Leaves nest: Chicks leave nest returning daily for 2 to 4 weeks, leaving the parental territory
at 4 to 12 months
Status: Vulnerable – decline overall despite increase in some managed populations
(BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust, 2011)
43
Appendix 5.
LITTLE SPOTTED KIWI (Apteryx owenii)
Location: Offshore islands off Northland, Coromandel, and the Marlborough Sounds; Kapiti
Island; Zealandia Wildlife Sanctuary in Wellington
Population size: 1,500 individuals
Adult size: Smallest species of kiwi; 25 cm high; Females – 1-1.9 kg, Males – up to 1.3 kg
Colour: Mottled grey
Habitat: All vegetation types, prefers coastal forest to upland areas
Incubation: 70 days; only males incubate
Leaves nest: Chicks leave at one week
Status: Near Threatened
(BNZ Save the Kiwi Trust, 2011)
