KIWICIDE IN WAITANGI Recollections of a nightmare

Forest and Bird, Volume 19, Issue 3, 1 August 1988, Page 11

KIWICIDE IN WAITANGI Recollections of a nightmare

How vulnerable is a substantial kiwi population to a marauding dog? Who would guess a single dog can do more than moderate harm, at most, to a population of nearly 1000 birds? A dramatic event in Northland’s Waitangi State Forest last year taught a different lesson: A German shepherd killed probably about 500 kiwi within a few weeks, or perhaps months. Without the incidental surveillance of two dozen birds by radio tracking, the largest brown kiwi population ever counted would now most likely be extinct. Dr Michael Taborsky reports on the tragedy.

Ir winter 1985 Barbara Hudde and I set out to study the extraordinary reproductive biology of kiwi in the wild. Waitangi Forest was the obvious location for this work. It is very accessible throughout, had a large and well documented kiwi population and even a number of banded birds. Detailed behavioural and spatial monitoring could additionally increase our knowledge on how kiwi cope with life in an exotic pine forest. From 1985 Barbara Hudde and | and an increasing number of helpful students came all the way every year to exchange a gentle Austrian summer sun for the cold and moist New Zealand winter nights to chase these secretive creatures, get stuck in heavy undergrowth, scratched by protuberant gorse, sink in hidden swamp holes and search for innumerable hours for kiwis with faulty transmitters. The joy of working with these exceptional birds more than compensated for these inconveniences.

Pleasure vanished

The pleasure vanished when on 24 August 1987 we found a dead kiwi on a routine check of birds with transmitters. She was a massive female which once had weighed almost 4 kg, the biggest bird ever caught in this forest. At home, close inspection revealed that she was killed by a dog. She had bruises and dents in the skin, some defeath-

ered areas and two little open wounds on a foot. Clotted blood was in her beak. We could interpret this symptom from our own experience with training a dog for kiwi capture. Tui, a young and still inexperienced Labrador retriever, once grabbed a kiwi and lifted it up for part of a second. Even though she released the bird immediately on my command, the poor bird, a young male, was bleeding from its beak. Fortunately he recovered but he breathed noisily for weeks and initially lost 14 percent of his body weight. This was an impressive demonstration of the delicacy of kiwi respiratory tracts. We were upset about the dead bird but suspected the culprit was only a dog being walked in the forest, as the killing happened on a weekend and close to a good walking track. I reported the incident to the Department of Conservation (DOC) Wellington. On 9 September we found a second kiwi corpse. We informed the local manager of Timberlands, the company in charge of the forest since the cessation of the Forest Service. Timberlands alerted the local press on 16 September, after we had found two more dead kiwi. The district office of DOC in Whangarei took responsibility for fighting the marauding dog, in coordination with local authoriities and the Timberlands’ management in

Kerikeri. Many potential measures were discussed and some were applied. Two cage traps were set on opposite ends of the forest. Occasionally volunteers patrolled along roads in the forest around dawn or dusk. Two caged bitches in heat were put next to a Cage trap when these measures did not succeed. Finally, untreated meat baits were laid, mainly to get better information on which parts of the forest the dog was using. Meanwhile we found more dead birds. A male incubating an egg and brooding a chick was killed along with his brood. Pieter and Gerda, his mate for the past 6 years at least, were killed 100 m away from each other. They had been banded and named by Rogan Colbourne and Ruud Kleinpaste in 1981, and they were still living in exactly the same area in 1987. Buul was another resident banded in 1982 that was killed. Dog never seen We never saw the dog despite the fact that three of us worked in the area for large parts of most nights. It appeared to avoid the places where we were working. This is also suggested by the localities where birds were killed. For example almost 80 percent of transmitter kiwi living outside our main study area were killed but only 43 percent within. On 25 and 27 September we found the members of a pair both dead after we had monitored them alive and active the night before. They were kills 12 and 15 out of 23 kiwi having transmitters when the disaster began. By this time I was very upset and expressed my resentment at the poor progress by the authorities in a newspaper interview. I blamed them especially for refusing to take the only action which we all had been very confident about right from the beginning: the use of poisoned bait. The reason for not doing this was virtually unbelievable. New Zealand legislation protects cattle, sheep, poultry and even cars from the harassment and peril of uncontrolled dogs, but it does not allow destruction of a marauding dog for the sake of kiwi or other wildlife. Most unfortunately the responsible authorities interpreted this awkward difference between economically important and ‘other’ subjects conservatively. 1080 poison was not applied because of the fear that a potential owner of this raging dog could eventually take legal steps against the applicants. Neither Timberlands nor DOC representatives in Whangarei and Wellington would take responsibility and do what everyone agreed should be done. Many kiwi perished because of this hesitation. Instead they wanted to get the dog alive. Yet the approach of using only two or four traps in an area of almost 3000 ha was ridiculous. Apart from that, a dog caught alive has to be returned to its owner, regardless of what continued threat it might be for an entire population of kiwi. On the day my critique appeared in the press things started to move. It was announced poison would be placed in the forest and patrols were greatly intensified. On the last day of September, one day before the poisoning programme was to be launched, the dog was destroyed by a group of four people working with dogs. The delinquent was a German shepherd bitch with

a collar but no registration. She had probably lived in the forest for weeks. The horror was over. Stomach contents showed that the bitch had lived mainly on possums but a few kiwi feathers were found in her faeces. None of our birds had been eaten or opened up apart from the two minor injuries of the first victim. Most birds were partly covered or completely buried when found. Ten dead kiwi without transmitters were found, despite the usually impossible chance of finding such birds. The bitch had been all through the forest, as revealed by her droppings. The calling rate of kiwi dropped dramatically and Rogan Colbourne’s trained kiwi-dog Tess only found dead kiwi when being worked through the forest. The estimate of 500 killed kiwi is based on the proportion of victims with transmitters and is perhaps conservative (see Taborsky, Notornis in press). Waitangi population important The Waitangi kiwi population is not only important for its size. It is also at the centre of the dispute over whether kiwi can exist in exotic forests. And it is by far the most intensively studied and repeatedly monitored population of kiwi. 147 birds have been banded, enabling long term observations on spacing and social structure on a large scale for the first time. Given the extremely low reproductive rate of kiwi in the wild, the population will probably take between 10 and 20 years to recover to its previous size, provided no similar disaster occurs during this time. How can this recovery be ensured? More importantly, how can a similar disaster, which would most likely eradicate the population, be prevented in the future? Being a foreigner I am limited to giving recommendations, which I have been happy to provide (for example in a report to DOC, November 1987 and in Taborsky, Notornis in press). It is now over to the New Zealand authorities to act and for the public to ensure that they do. I am sorry to say that the prospects for effective protection of kiwi in Waitangi are not too promising. Firstly, detecting predation on kiwi is very unlikely. It was merely a lucky coincidence that our study, which involved telemetry, was in progress when this incident happened. One or two kiwi corpses encountered by chance would hardly cause a major reaction. More likely it will be too late when the extent of serious predation becomes evident. Secondly, it is hard to convince people of the significance of the issue. For example, while the forest was still haunted by this mysterious dog, Timberlands could not be convinced that Waitangi Forest had to be strictly closed for dogs. This is especially remarkable as a substantial part of the forest is a national reserve which belongs to the Waitangi Endowment Trust. Shortly after the marauding dog was destroyed I encountered an unleashed dog in the forest in the middle of night. The owners when questioned believed that their dog ‘‘would not do anything as weird as hunting kiwi’. When | left New Zealand there were still no

signs at the gates prohibiting dogs from the forest. I think we cannot afford to assume that the kiwi massacre described here was an isolated incident. Thirdly, pigs have recently been released in Waitangi State Forest. Apart from being a threat to kiwi, they have obviously been liberated to establish a hunting population. Needless to say, in New Zealand pigs are hunted with free roaming dogs. Imperfect protection Last but not least I am sceptical that the necessary administrative and legislative changes will occur. The imperfect protection of wildlife from the action of uncontrolled dogs is a general problem in New Zealand. A modification of laws will not be sufficient if not supplemented by better education of the public and stricter control. This will be difficult in a country where dogs have not only important emotional but also economic significance. To me, the kiwi massacre was an extremely depressing experience. Six months later, though less emotionally involved I am even more concerned. The threat dogs pose to kiwi is not limited to Waitangi Forest. Numerous people working in the conservation field report that kiwi have disappeared from many areas during the past 20 years. Not surprisingly, this is mainly true for areas adjoining farmland and small towns. Knowledge about current kiwi distribution and, especially densities, is incredibly poor. Due to the initiative of Rogan Colbourne, a country-wide kiwi census has been started recently, using stardardized data sheets for vocalization counts. This is the first comprehensive kiwi survey ever performed in new Zealand. Until now, drastic declines of kiwi in may parts of the country have remained unrecorded. Unless there are regular counts in many areas it will be impossible to know of a sudden population decline before it is too late. All the more important then to stop uncontrolled dogs in forests. Perhaps the most important point to emerge from this incident is the poor status of conservation in New Zealand. It appears that economic and human interests always prevail. For example, signs along roads urge New Zealanders to be careful with fire as ‘fire destroys the habitat of wildlife’’. If it were really the interests of wildlife that initiated these signs rather than saving trees for timber then surely authorities would have acted immediately to save the kiwi. In addition, legislation gives dogs greater protection than kiwi. Perhaps dogs or pine trees could become the national symbol for New Zealand. Unless attitudes and legislation changes, a small hairy green fruit may soon be the only ‘‘kiwi’’ New Zealand is known for. # Dr Michael Taborsky is a scientist employed by the Austrian Academy of Sciences. In coordination with the Academy, the Max Planck Institute, Auckland University and the Conservation Department he has been mainly studying kiwi parental behaviour. Acknowledgements I thank Barbara Hudde and Dr. John Craig for their critique on the manuscript, and to the Max Planck Institute for its financial support.