state, trends and vulnerability in new zealand’s ... · state, trends and vulnerability in new...
TRANSCRIPT
State, trends and vulnerability in New Zealand’s indigenous biodiversity
Susan Walker Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, Dunedin Landcare Research LINK seminar Wellington, Friday 24th April 2015
Thanks People Rachel McClellan, John Sawyer, James Reardon, John Barkla, John Leathwick, Nick Head, Ingrid Grüner, Phil Lyver, Hendrik Moller, Sarah Richardson, Andrea Byrom, Bill Lee, Adrian Monks, Andrew Gormley, John Innes, Rob Schuckard, David Melville, Phil Battley, Hugh Robertson, Adrian Riegen, Richard Allibone, Ron Moorhouse, Josh Fyfe, Kath Walker, Graeme Elliott, Liz Parlato, Craig Wilson, Kate Steffens, Simon Moore, Paul Bradfield, Jessica Scrimgeour, Andrew Smart, Brian Rance, Jeremy Rolfe, Rod Hitchmough, Avi Holzapfel, Richard Ewans, Dave Kelly, Theo Stephens, Ellen Cieraad, Joy Comrie, Andy Hutcheon, Jo Monks, Dave Towns, Hermann Frank, Deb Wilson, Richard Maloney, Fraser Maddigan, Anita Spenser Organisations Ornithological Society of NZ, DOC, Landcare Research, NIWA, Wildland Consultants, University of Otago, University of Canterbury, Massey University, Kea Conservation Trust
New Zealand’s biota
“Exquisitely strange”
Highly endemic Highly threatened
Bradshaw et al. 2010. Evaluating the relative environmental impact of countries. PLoS ONE 5.
Vulnerability
vulnerability gradient
Som
e m
easu
re
of a
bund
ance
ROBUST VULNERABLE
NZ’s indigenous biodiversity
‘the variety of life’ or ‘the full range’
Vulnerability
vulnerability gradient
Som
e m
easu
re
of a
bund
ance
ROBUST VULNERABLE
NZ’s indigenous birds
moa huia
paradise duck pukeko black backed gull
saddleback kokako fantail weka rock wren
tui robin kaka
Humans settle (c. 780 BP)
Ship rats & pigs
Future state II
Future state I Pākehā arrive (c. 1850 AD) NOW
‘Green revolution’ (modern agriculture)
Som
e m
easu
re
of a
bund
ance
ROBUST VULNERABLE
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re
of a
bund
ance
LOSS
Humans settle (c. 780 BP)
Ship rats & pigs
Future state II
Future state I Pākehā arrive (c. 1850 AD) NOW
‘Green revolution’ (modern agriculture)
Som
e m
easu
re
of a
bund
ance
Analogy
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re
of a
bund
ance
LOSS
Focus
Future state I: future representation
NOW: current representation
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re
of a
bund
ance
LOSS
This talk Part 1: Indigenous habitats and species between the lines Part 2: A vulnerability-based framework to make the most difference, and its information needs
Indigenous cover in land environments 500 Level IV Land environments of LENZ
% in
dige
nous
la
nd co
ver l
eft
RETAINED
CLEARED
500 Land environments (LENZ) SAFE VULNERABLE
TO CLEARANCE
Indigenous cover 2002
Indigenous cover 2012
Less than 30% indigenous cover left = 57%
Walker et al. 2006. Recent loss of indigenous cover in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 30: 169–177 Updated by Cieraad et al. (2014, in prep)
Indigenous cover in land environments
Cieraad, Walker, Price & Barringer 2015. An updated assessment of indigenous cover remaining and legal protection in New Zealand’s land environments. New Zealand Journal of Ecology in press
% in
dige
nous
la
nd co
ver l
eft
RETAINED
CLEARED
500 Land environments (LENZ) SAFE
VULNERABILITY TO CLEARANCE
Indigenous cover in land environments
Indigenous cover change in land environments (LCDB4) 2002 - 2012
Cieraad, Walker, Price & Barringer 2015. An updated assessment of indigenous cover
remaining and legal protection in New Zealand’s land environments. New Zealand Journal of
Ecology in press.
Indigenous grassland loss rate increasing
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
1990 – 2001 2001 – 2008
Urban Mining
Cropland
Pasture
Wilding trees
Planted forest Rate
of c
onve
rsio
n (h
ecta
res p
er a
nnum
)
Study area
Weeks et al. 2013. Past and recent conversion of indigenous grasslands in the South Island. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 30: 127–138
Indigenous grassland loss rate increasing
Annual conversion rate
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000
1998
19
99
2000
20
01
2002
20
03
2004
20
05
2006
20
07
2008
20
09
2010
20
11
2012
20
13
North Canterbury South Canterbury Otago
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
1998
19
99
2000
20
01
2002
20
03
2004
20
05
2006
20
07
2008
20
09
2010
20
11
2012
20
13
North Canterbury South Canterbury Otago
Primary driver of conversion More cows = more land
Cows ‘Effective hectares’
Published statistics from LIC/Dairy NZ: New Zealand Dairy Statistics Annual Reports
Tota
l cow
s (nu
mbe
r of a
nim
als)
Tota
l effe
ctiv
e h
ecta
res (
ha)
Year Year
CLEARED
500 Land environments (LENZ)
Legal protection 2012 (>96% DOC, <1% Councils, 2% Nga Whenua Rahui, 1% QEII)
% p
rote
cted
Legal protection across land environments
2012
Cieraad, Walker, Price & Barringer 2015. An updated assessment of indigenous cover remaining and legal protection in New Zealand’s land environments. New Zealand Journal of Ecology in press
CLEARED
500 Land environments (LENZ)
% p
rote
cted
Legal protection across land environments
2012 2004
Little change in low, flat, warm environments
Increase in high elevation (esp. SI high country)
Cieraad, Walker, Price & Barringer 2015. An updated assessment of indigenous cover remaining and legal protection in New Zealand’s land environments. New Zealand Journal of Ecology in press
Cieraad, Walker, Price & Barringer 2015. An updated assessment of indigenous cover
remaining and legal protection in New Zealand’s land environments. New Zealand
Journal of Ecology in press
Status of land environments
“… a number of lowland and montane environments have
less indigenous vegetation and protection than was
previously estimated”
Status of naturally uncommon ecosystems
Status of naturally uncommon ecosystems
Inland saline habitat, Central Otago
Pic of ephemeral wetland here
Status of naturally uncommon ecosystems
Ephemeral wetland, Ashburton Basin
Outwash plain, Upper Waitaki basin
Status of naturally uncommon ecosystems
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
2012
Not threatened (37%)
Vulnerable (14%)
Endangered (24%)
Critical (25%)
Holdaway et al. 2012. Status assessment of NZ’s naturally uncommon ecosystems. Conservation Biology 26: 619–629.
IUCN categories
Status of naturally uncommon ecosystems
Status of naturally uncommon ecosystems Few are mapped, no formal status monitoring
Upper Waitaki basin
Status of species
2013
2012
Reptiles (97 taxa)
2012
Birds (264 taxa)
Different biota, different vulnerabilities
2012
Department of Conservation: http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/conservation/nz-threat-classification-system/
Not threatened Declining Threatened Extinct
‘At Risk’
Naturally uncommon
Relict or recovering
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Vascular plants (2326 taxa)
Freshwater fish (52 taxa)
10 y
ears
Department of Conservation: http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/conservation/nz-threat-classification-system/
Not threatened Declining Threatened Extinct
‘At Risk’
Naturally uncommon
Relict or recovering
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Vascular plants (2326 taxa)
2002
2005
2008
2012
“…the majority of … new Threatened taxa are genuinely at risk of extinction. Many … restricted to the eastern South Island, especially the intermontane basins …”
(de Lange et al. 2009)
Changing threat status assessments
10 y
ears
Department of Conservation: http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/conservation/nz-threat-classification-system/
Not threatened Declining Threatened Extinct
‘At Risk’
Naturally uncommon
Relict or recovering
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Vascular plants (2326 taxa)
2002
2005
2008
2012
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Freshwater fish (52 taxa)
2002
2005
2008
2013
11 y
ears
Threatened fish endemic to South Island inland basins
Lowland longjaw galaxiids (x2 subspp.)
Bignose galaxiid
Upland longjaw galaxiid (x2 subspp.)
Canterbury mudfish
Goodman et al. 2014. Conservation status of New Zealand freshwater fish, 2013. New Zealand Threat Classification Series 7. 12 p
Flathead, Dusky, Eldon’s, Roundhead (x4? subspp.) galaxiids
Gollum galaxiid
Shortjaw kokopu
Declining endemic fish in South Island basins
Inanga
Koaro
Torrentfish
Canterbury galaxiid
Bluegill bully Redfin bully
Goodman et al. 2014. Conservation status of New Zealand freshwater fish, 2013. New Zealand Threat Classification Series 7. 12 p
Longfin eel
Hitchmough et al. 2013. Conservation status of New Zealand reptiles, 2012. New Zealand Threat Classification Series 2. 16 p Department of Conservation: http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/conservation/nz-threat-classification-system/
Not threatened Declining Threatened Extinct
‘At Risk’
Naturally uncommon
Relict or recovering
2012
10 y
ears
2002
2005
2008
Reptiles (97 species)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Canterbury lizard species
Common name Status 2013 Status 2009
Rangitata skink Nationally Critical
Rough gecko Nationally Vulnerable Declining
West Coast green gecko Nationally Vulnerable Declining
Scree skink Nationally Vulnerable Declining
Spotted skink "Mackenzie Basin" Nationally Vulnerable
Spotted skink "Central Canterbury" Nationally Vulnerable
Large Otago gecko Declining
Cryptic skink Declining Not Threatened
Jewelled gecko Declining
Canterbury gecko Declining
Green skink Declining
Southern long-toed skink Declining
Common skink clade 4 Declining Not Threatened
Common skink clade 5 Declining Not Threatened
Marlborough mini gecko Not Threatened
Common gecko Not Threatened
Southern Alps gecko Not Threatened
Pygmy gecko Not Threatened
McCann's skink Not Threatened
Acknowledgement: Dr Marieke Lettink, Fauna Finders Hitchmough et al. 2013. Conservation status of New Zealand reptiles, 2012. New Zealand Threat Classification Series 2. 16 p
Department of Conservation: http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/conservation/nz-threat-classification-system/
Not threatened Declining Threatened Extinct
‘At Risk’
Naturally uncommon
Relict or recovering
2012
10 y
ears
2002
2005
2008
Reptiles (97 species)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Birds (264 species)
2012
10 y
ears
2002
2005
2008
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
© Craig McKenzie
Implications of low numbers
Traill et al. 2010. Pragmatic conservation targets in a rapidly changing world.
Conservation Biology 143: 28–34
Implications of low numbers
0
100
200
300
2002 2012
plants
reptiles fw. fish
birds
Num
ber o
f thr
eate
ned
taxa
Number of NZ taxa recognised as threatened
Year
Two areas of progress 1. Stabilisation of some of the most charismatic of New
Zealand’s threatened species
Burns et al. 2009. In: Fencing for conservation. New York, Springer. Pp. Bellingham et al. 2010. Island restoration. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 34: 11
Kelly & Sullivan 2010. Progress and prospects in NZ ecology. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 34: 20
Stabilisation of some threatened species
uncommon relict
0
5
10
15
20
Not threatened Naturally Recovering Declining Threatened
Offshore & near-shore islands
Number of taxa translocated to 2010 (of weta, amphibians, reptiles, & birds)
Num
ber o
f tax
a tr
anslo
cate
d Predator-fenced mainland
1970s 2000s Change
Walker and Monks in prep. based on Ornithological Society of New Zealand data
in Bull et al. 1985 and Robertson et al. 2007
Native waders Occupancy
South Island pied oystercatcher (Declining)
1970s 2000s Change
Walker and Monks in prep. based on Ornithological Society of New Zealand data
in Bull et al. 1985 and Robertson et al. 2007
Native waders Occupancy
Pied stilt (Declining)
1970s 2000s Change
Walker and Monks in prep. based on Ornithological Society of New Zealand data
in Bull et al. 1985 and Robertson et al. 2007
Native waders Occupancy
Banded dotterel (Nationally Vulnerable)
1970s 2000s Change
Walker and Monks in prep. based on Ornithological Society of New Zealand data
in Bull et al. 1985 and Robertson et al. 2007
Native waders Occupancy
Wrybill (Nationally Vulnerable)
1970s 2000s Change
Walker and Monks in prep. based on Ornithological Society of New Zealand data
in Bull et al. 1985 and Robertson et al. 2007
Native waders Occupancy
Black stilt (Nationally Critical)
1970s 2000s Change
Terns and gulls Occupancy
Black-billed gull (Nationally Critical)
Walker and Monks in prep. based on Ornithological Society of New Zealand data
in Bull et al. 1985 and Robertson et al. 2007
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
1973 1978 1984 1989 1995 2000 2006
Mataura
Waiau
Aparima
Oreti
Num
ber o
f bird
s
McLellan 2008.The ecology and management of Southland’s black billed gulls. PhD thesis, University of Otago
Counts 1977 – 2007
Declining 6% p.a (84% over 30 years)
Terns and gulls Black-billed gull (Nationally Critical) on four Southland rivers
Counts repeated at monitoring sites 4 – 18 times, 1962 – 2008 8 significant decreases
Annual rate of change (%) +/- 1.96 * SE
Ashburton (north branch) Ashley
Cameron Conway
Hakataramea Opihi
Twizel
-20 -10 0 10 20
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Low
flow
Ahuriri Ashburton
Cass Eglinton
Makarora Manuherikia
Ohau Orari
Pukaki Rees
Shotover Tekapo
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Med
ium
flow
Dart Hopkins
Hunter Hurunui
Matukituki
o
o
o
o
o
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hig
h flo
w
Rakaia (lower) Rangitata (lower)
Tasman Waimakariri (lower)
Waitaki
o
o
o
o
o
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
very
hig
h increase decrease
only site with sustained predator control (aimed at mustelids)
Terns and gulls Black-fronted terns (Nationally Endangered) 29 South Island rivers
O'Donnell & Hoare 2011. Population trends in black-fronted terns. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 35: 30–43
FLO
W
1970s 2000s Change
Terns and gulls Occupancy
Black-fronted tern (Nationally Endangered)
Walker and Monks in prep. based on Ornithological Society of New Zealand data
in Bull et al. 1985 and Robertson et al. 2007
Increased in most places
Decreased in most places
Increased in some places,
decreased in others
Decrease Increase
Forest and alpine birds Change in occupancy 1970s to 2000s
Walker and Monks in prep. Bull et al. 1985. The atlas of bird distribution in New Zealand. Wellington,
New Zealand, The Ornithological Society of New Zealand Robertson et al. 2007. Atlas of bird distribution in New Zealand 1999–2004.
Wellington, New Zealand, The Ornithological Society of New Zealand
Tokoeka −2% pa
Great spotted kiwi −2% pa
Unmanaged Brown kiwi −3% pa
Remaining extensive kiwi populations
Holzapfel et al. 2008. Kiwi (Apteryx spp.) recovery plan. Threatened Species Recovery Plan 60. Department of Conservation
Years
% re
mai
ning
Projected decline curves
Changes in common forest birds over 3 decades with possum and wasp invasion
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1974-1984 baseline
Significant decrease
Aver
age
num
ber o
f bird
s
Mt Misery, Nelson Lakes National Park
5-minute bird
counts, 33 years,
1974 – 2007
Declines not evident above
1000m
Significant increase
No significant change
Elliott et al. 2010. Declines in common widespread birds in a mature tempoerate forest. Biological Conservation 143: 2119–2126
Kaka sex ratios
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Stafford Haast kiwi sanctuary
Waitutu Nelson Lakes
Increasing time since possum invasion
Fem
ale:
mal
e ra
tio
South Westland possum front c. 1990
Elliott 2010 & 2013, DOC unpublished data
Without (left) and with (right) possums
Recent possum arrival St
oat-
& p
ossu
m-fr
ee is
land
s
Hope (<3% possum RTC
maintained with 1080)
Hope
200
7
Hope
201
3
Island populations
Kea disappearances, St Arnaud Range Repeated census (1988, 2011)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1998 2011
11
3 different
birds
Num
ber o
f fem
ale
bird
s
Consecutive beech masts 1999 & 2000
Beech mast 2006
Kemp, 2013. An update on the kea population at Nelson Lakes National Park. DOC unpublished data
Halting or reversing mainland forest species declines is (largely) a matter of scaling up
Time
without action
present state
with action
difference made
Best
present state
with action
difference made
without action
Better
with action
present state
without action
difference made
Good
Areas of progress 2. Advances in mammalian predator management
1080 drops 1998, 2000, 2004, 2009, fenn trapping for stoats from 2000
Forest bird numbers under sustained pest control, mid-Landsborough, South Westland
Significant increase Significant decrease
O’Donnell & Hoare 2012. Bird recovery after pest control. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 36: 131–140
Forest bird relative abundance in four mainland islands under sustained pest control
Rela
tiive
ab
unda
nce
of b
irds
Time since onset of treatment (years) Time since onset of treatment (years)
Podocarp forests Boundary Stream, Hawke’s Bay & Trounson Kauri Park, Northland
Beech forests Hurunui , inland Canterbury &
Rotoiti, Nelson Lakes National Park
Difference between mainland island and nearby non-treatment area over time
Bett
er
Wor
se
Innes et al. 2010. What limits forest birds? New Zealand Journal of Ecology 34: 86–114
Kaka mortality and recruitment with and without predator control 1996–2000
No predator control
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Mortality (deaths)
Recruitment (births)
Predator control
after Moorhouse et al. 2003. Control of introduced mammalian predators improves kaka Nestor meridionalis breeding success…Biological Conservation 1190: 33–44.
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
Saw
yer C
k
Glas
seye
Ck
Kaka
po
Bulle
r Riv
er
Happ
y Va
lley
Goat
cree
k
6 M
ile
Mao
ri Gu
lly
Kara
mea
Blu
ffs
Glas
seye
Cre
ek u
pper
Mou
ntai
n Cr
eek
Mac
kay
dow
ns
St A
ndre
ws
Bellb
ird ri
dge
Char
min
g cr
eek
Heap
hy
Mea
n an
nual
chan
ge in
den
sity
per 1
00m
2
Annual control Non-treatment Standard/biennial control ops
Powelliphanta snail populations (change in number per 100m2 per year)
Increasing frequency of possum control No possum control
Bockett et al. 2004. Is possum control protecting Powelliphanta snails on the West Coast? DOC, unpublished data
North Westland, 14 species,
16 sites, monitored between
1994 & 2003
Pittosporum patulum with and without possum control
0
50
100
150
2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
no possum control
possum control
200
250
300
350
400
possum control
No. LIVE plants
No. DEAD plants
no possum control
Num
ber o
f pla
nts
Num
ber o
f pla
nts
Populations in Dobson, Huxley & Temple valleys Upper Waitaki, 2003 – 2010
Comrie, Head. DOC unpublished data
0
100
200
300
2002 2012
plants
reptiles fw. fish
birds
Num
ber o
f thr
eate
ned
taxa
Number of NZ taxa recognised as threatened
Year
Three credible reasons for growing numbers of species in decline
Reason No 1. Landscape-scale predator management evades us
Andrew Smart, DOC, unpublished data FOR ESTIMATED DECLINES IN THE ABSENCE OF MANAGEMENT SEE
Whitehead 2010. Large-scale predator control increases population viability of a rare New Zealand riverine duck. Austral Ecology 35: 722–730
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Joes Arthur
North Branch Worlesley/Castle Cleddau
Neale Burn
Clinton
Num
ber o
f pai
rs p
er k
m
Pairs per km of rivers searched
Totals 28 pairs known 2007 44 pairs known 2011
Numbers of Fiordland whio in managed populations (stoat trapping, translocations)
1970s 2000s Change
Walker and Monks in prep. based on Ornithological Society of New Zealand data
in Bull et al. 1985 and Robertson et al. 2007
Blue duck (Nationally Vulnerable)
Whio Occupancy
Grand and Otago skinks in an experimental management trial, Macraes Flat, Otago
predator-proof fence vs
intensive trapping vs
unmanaged
Grand and Otago
Skink Recovery Group, DOC
unpublished data
Capt
ures
per
100
trap
nig
hts
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004
Copper skink Not Threatened
0
1
2
3
4
5
1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004
Whitaker’s skink Nationally Endangered
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004
Brown skink Declining
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004
Common skink Declining Hoare et al. 2007. Attempting to manage
complex predator-prey interactions. Journal of Wildlife Management 71: 1576–1584
Four species of lizard Pukerua Bay, near Wellington, 1984–2006
Records the disappearance of the
last mainland population of Whitaker’s skink
0
100
200
300
2002 2012
plants
reptiles fw. fish birds
Num
ber o
f thr
eate
ned
taxa
Number of NZ taxa recognised as threatened
Year
Reason No 2. Habitat conversion and species overexploitation continues
High country tussock and freshwater habitat conversion
Fyke net of longfin eels
Longfin eel (Declining)
Common skink, Rangitata riverbed Oligosoma aff. polychroma Clade 5 (Declining) 20 ha of remaining lizard habitat on the Canterbury Plains, cleared Autumn 2014
Pillow pimelea in the Upper Clutha Pimelea sericeovillosa subsp. pulvinaris (Declining)
Largest remaining population (10,000+ plants, Upper Clutha)
disked in autumn 2014
0
0
0
0
00
00
00
0
0
0
‘Greenness’ changes in production landscapes,1970s to mid-2000s
Largest increase
Greatest decrease
Growing season length
Base (winter)
greenness
Exploratory work with Robert Buitenwerf and Adrian Monks
Land use intensification also entails habitat conversion
Canterbury plains ‘dryland’ kanuka remnants
Watering the Eyrewell Scientific Reserve
Culverden Scientific Reserve’s
exotic grass sward
Shrubby tororaro, Kaitorete Spit (Muehlenbeckia astonii, Nationally Endangered)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Plan
t vol
ume
in m
3
Fenced plants (n = 60)
Unfenced plants (n = 60)
median size (fenced)
median size (unfenced)
Plant dimensions 2001 – 2012
Spenser, Head. DOC unpublished data
Recovery of plants from browse, but no recruitment…
Lepidium solandri , Nationally Endangered (photo: John Barkla)
0
51015
202530
35
Num
ber o
f pla
nts
Num
ber o
f pla
nts
Num
ber o
f pla
nts
0
5
10
15
20
25
050100150200250300350
01020304050607080
010203040506070
2001 2013Time
2001 2013Time
Craig Wilson, DOC unpublished data
Dryland cress in Central Otago (Lepidium solandri , Nationally Endangered)
Rapid, simultaneous demise of remaining
populations
Plant counts at five remaining Central Otago populations, 2001–2013
Reason No 3. Climate change
9
3 2 2
1
5
8
2
10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8
10
Num
ber o
f bird
taxa
cha
nged
Mor
e th
reat
ened
Le
ss th
reat
ened
Bird threat status changes 2008 to 2012, by group
100
200
300
400
500
600
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
Antipodean wandering albatross
Males
Females
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
Males
Females
Gibson’s Wandering albatross
100
200
300
400
500
600
Wandering albatrosses Declines and diminishing sex ratios Numbers of birds estimated using mark-recapture methods, 1995 to present
Num
ber o
f bird
s
Kath Walker & Graeme Elliot, personal unpublished data
Num
ber o
f bird
s
Percentage of spring eggs (almost) fledged in summer
Cuthbert & Somer, Bradfield, DOC unpublished data
Hutton’s shearwaters in two Kaikoura colonies
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Kowhai River Colony (no stoat control)
Shearwater Stream Colony (stoat control since 2009)
% o
f egg
s
2013
Breeding success is ‘episodic’ and not explained by predation
Henrik Moller et al., University of Otago, unpublished data
Titi on Rakiura over 70 years Harvest success from 9 ‘harvest diaries’
0.0
0.3
0.5
0.8
1.0
1.3
1.5
1.8
2.0
2.3
1938 1958 1968 1978 1988 1998 1948
Harv
est s
ucce
ss
(Cat
ch p
er u
nit e
ffort
)
Summing up Part I
Growing numbers of species in decline
• More and more New Zealand species are known to be, or are being, reduced to low numbers
• Predators, habitat conversion and overexploitation are the major causes
• Climate change is starting to exacerbate the effects of both
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re
of a
bund
ance
Goals
NZ’s indigenous biodiversity
‘the variety of life’ or ‘the full range’
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re
of a
bund
ance
Goals
LOSS
POSSIBLE GOAL I
NOW: current representation
‘Reverse the decline’
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re
of a
bund
ance
LOSS
Goals
POSSIBLE GOAL II: ‘Halt the decline’
NOW: current representation
‘Halt the decline’
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re
of a
bund
ance
LOSS
POSSIBLE GOAL III
NOW: current representation
Goals ‘Slow the decline’
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re o
f abu
ndan
ce
LOSS
LOSS
DIFFERENCE MADE
Reverse the decline
Do nothing
Difference is made by changing the fate of vulnerable biota
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re o
f abu
ndan
ce
LOSS
LOSS
Halt the decline
Do nothing
Difference is made by changing the fate of vulnerable biota
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re o
f abu
ndan
ce
LOSS
LOSS
Slow the decline
Do nothing
Difference is made by changing the fate of vulnerable biota
Maximise difference to the biodiversity goal (not to a site or sites)
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re o
f abu
ndan
ce
LOSS
LOSS
Slow the decline
Do nothing
Difference is made by changing the fate of vulnerable biota
NOW: current representation FUTURE
Maximise difference relative to the future state, not the current state
ROBUST VULNERABLE
Som
e m
easu
re o
f abu
ndan
ce
Do nothing
LOSS DIFFERENCE MADE
Do worse than nothing
Pressey et al. 2004. Ecology Letters 7: 1035–1046; Walker et al. 2007. Conservation Biology 22: 48-59; Weeks et al. 2013. Environmental Conservation 40: 84-95
Displacement activity kills “By failing to avert present or impending threats while pre-empting [actions] that could be more
effective… contributions can be irretrievably negative” (Pressey 2013)
Difference is made by changing the fate of vulnerable biota
Four things you need to know
Four things you need to know
• Present and impending threats, and where
• What biota are rare and vulnerable to those threats, and where
• Effect of prospective management on threats
• Effects of threats (with and without management) on biota
Pressures (e.g. pests, weeds,
land clearance)
Current native biodiversity
Future native biodiversity
Effects of management on
pressures [Management-
Pressure Models]
Effects of pressures on biodiversity
[Biodiversity Loss Models]
Pressures with management
time NOW FUTURE
Vital Sites & Actions general framework
Threats (distribution & abundances of
predators)
Current native species
distributions (& abundances)
Future native species
distributions (& abundances)
Effects of management on
threats [Management-
Pressure Models]
Effects of threats on species
[Biodiversity Loss Models]
Threats with management
time NOW FUTURE
• Present and impending threats, and where
• What biota are rare and vulnerable to those threats, and where
Vital Sites & Actions – a formulation
Threats (distribution & abundances of
predators)
Effects of management on
threats [Management-
Pressure Models]
Effects of threats on species
[Biodiversity Loss Models]
Threats with management
time NOW FUTURE
• Present and impending threats, and where.
• What biota are rare and vulnerable to those threats, and where.
• Effect of prospective management on threats.
• Effects of varying levels of threats on biota.
Current native species
distributions (& abundances)
Future native species
distributions (& abundances)
Vital Sites & Actions – a formulation
Threats (distribution & abundances of
predators)
Effects of management on
threats [Management-
Pressure Models]
Effects of threats on species
[Biodiversity Loss Models]
Threats with management
time NOW FUTURE
• Present and impending threats, and where.
• What biota are rare and vulnerable to those threats, and where.
• Effect of prospective management on threats.
• Effects of varying levels of threats on biota.
Current native species
distributions (& abundances)
Future native species
distributions (& abundances)
Vital Sites & Actions – a formulation
Where it’s at
Significance
Benefits of management
Vital sites
Outputs Planning
Reporting
Difference made by actions
Inputs: identifies the essential biodiversity information for conservation action
Walker et al. 2012. NZ Journal of Ecology 36: 243-251.
designed to evolve and upgrade
Brings inventory, monitoring, management & research together •Targeted inventory & monitoring for species and threats to them •Monitoring operation outcomes •Research and management experiments to improve models (pressure-biodiversity effects and management-pressure effects) and data •Improved concepts and analysis methods for disparate data sources •New spatial condition & pattern frameworks and information etc
Journey not end point
Pressures (e.g. pests, weeds,
land clearance)
Current native biodiversity
Future native biodiversity
Effects of management on
pressures [Management-
Pressure Models]
Effects of pressures on biodiversity
[Biodiversity Loss Models]
Pressures with management
time NOW FUTURE
Information for conservation action
Information for conservation action
• Must focus on vulnerable biodiversity (and threats to it)
• Requires broader and different information than state and trend reporting, and is challenging
• Can be built over time, by multiple contributors, adding new areas of endeavour and new information
Summing up Part 2
Thanks People Rachel McClellan, John Sawyer, James Reardon, John Barkla, John Leathwick, Nick Head, Ingrid Grüner, Phil Lyver, Hendrik Moller, Sarah Richardson, Andrea Byrom, Bill Lee, Adrian Monks, Andrew Gormley, John Innes, Rob Schuckard, David Melville, Phil Battley, Hugh Robertson, Adrian Riegen, Richard Allibone, Ron Moorhouse, Josh Fyfe, Kath Walker, Graeme Elliott, Liz Parlato, Craig Wilson, Kate Steffens, Simon Moore, Paul Bradfield, Jessica Scrimgeour, Andrew Smart, Brian Rance, Jeremy Rolfe, Rod Hitchmough, Avi Holzapfel, Richard Ewans, Dave Kelly, Theo Stephens, Ellen Cieraad, Joy Comrie, Andy Hutcheon, Jo Monks, Dave Towns, Hermann Frank, Deb Wilson, Richard Maloney, Fraser Maddigan, Anita Spenser Organisations Ornithological Society of NZ, DOC, Landcare Research, NIWA, Wildland Consultants, University of Otago, University of Canterbury, Massey University, Kea Conservation Trust