New Zealand Species Held Overseas

Chlidonias said:
*Morepork (as opposed to boobook) also used to be in some overseas collections but I don't think there are any left now?
Click to expand...

Sadly you are correct on this account. In the highly, highly unlikely event the NZ government permits certain species to be exported again, the Morepork is one of the three I'm most like to see come to Europe, along with the North Island Kaka and a boost of new blood to the North Island Brown Kiwi populations.
 
TeaLovingDave said:
Sadly you are correct on this account. In the highly, highly unlikely event the NZ government permits certain species to be exported again, the Morepork is one of the three I'm most like to see come to Europe, along with the North Island Kaka and a boost of new blood to the North Island Brown Kiwi populations.
Click to expand...
animals do get exported from NZ from time to time (as with Australia, they seem to like to do random things to keep people on their toes....).

Five kiwi were sent over to the USA in 2010 (destined for both USA and Europe): http://www.zoochat.com/17/kiwi-oe-147270/

Tuatara get sent out irregularly as well to select zoos (the San Diego Brothers Islands tuatara are a good example of something you wouldn't expect).

Morepork are unlikely though. I'd myself like more kaka sent overseas (they can be bred easily enough so surplus over-represented stock wouldn't be hard to breed on demand, as it were, for export). The NZ pigeon is another one that would be nice to see in overseas zoos that specialise in birds, but not many places breed them (the ones in zoos here are mostly rescue birds) so that's not going to happen. Weka would be a very good bird to establish overseas.

However I don't know if there would be enough interest in rather boring (to the public) NZ birds to keep overseas populations going even if there were some exports.
 
Chlidonias said:
animals do get exported from NZ from time to time (as with Australia, they seem to like to do random things to keep people on their toes....).

Five kiwi were sent over to the USA in 2010 (destined for both USA and Europe): http://www.zoochat.com/17/kiwi-oe-147270/

Tuatara get sent out irregularly as well to select zoos (the San Diego Brothers Islands tuatara are a good example of something you wouldn't expect).

Morepork are unlikely though. I'd myself like more kaka sent overseas (they can be bred easily enough so surplus over-represented stock wouldn't be hard to breed on demand, as it were, for export). The NZ pigeon is another one that would be nice to see in overseas zoos that specialise in birds, but not many places breed them (the ones in zoos here are mostly rescue birds) so that's not going to happen. Weka would be a very good bird to establish overseas.

However I don't know if there would be enough interest in rather boring (to the public) NZ birds to keep overseas populations going even if there were some exports.
Click to expand...

I don't think we should export any more species, although more individuals of established species (e.g. kiwi and kea) if needed would be OK. While NZ species are amazing, people should come to NZ to see them, which benefits NZ's economy and hopefully the species themselves. I know not all people can travel to NZ, but those that don't can still see representative species in Europe anyway. Also, establishing species like Kaka or Morepork in Europe will use up spaces that could be used to help endangered species from countries where conservation programmes are not as good as here.

@TLD: Why Morepork? I would put that way down the list of interesting NZ birds, especially when there are already Boobooks in the UK and Europe anyway, which are the same species.
 
zooboy28 said:
@TLD: Why Morepork? I would put that way down the list of interesting NZ birds, especially when there are already Boobooks in the UK and Europe anyway, which are the same species.
Click to expand...
that depends on your taxonomy. Traditionally they are considered the same species, but more often now they are split in two (Ninox novaeseelandiae in New Zealand, Lord Howe and Norfolk, and Ninox boobook in Australia). Then there's the Tasmanian boobook which has recently been suggested as belonging to N. novaeseelandiae rather than N. boobook which is a little confusing!
 
zooboy28 said:
@TLD: Why Morepork? I would put that way down the list of interesting NZ birds, especially when there are already Boobooks in the UK and Europe anyway, which are the same species.
Click to expand...

I like owls :p
 
Chlidonias said:
a supporter of smuggling and keeping illegally-obtained reptiles are you?
Click to expand...

Chlidonias, you're making it sound like I am Anson Wong, the notorious animal trafficker. No need. Yes, I purchase animals at the Hamm show, but all the animals have proper C.I.T.E.S. paperwork and other documentation. I also only purchase animals from my friends that hatched the animals I acquire. I'm all for captive propagation. I enjoy my hobby. What is so wrong with that? Most of my charges have dwindling populations in the Wild. The private sector is not bad, in fact, more reptiles do better in private hands, as they are given what they need to support their daily life functions. Unlike Zoos, Aquariums, other Institutions, where they are placed in a box, that looks like a postcard of where they are supposed to occur in the wild. Not putting down Zoos, Aquariums and other Institutions, but they may have great collections, but do all of the reptiles in their care breed? No, they don't. They have such large collections and staff that work with those animals for a limited time, whereas, someone like myself, who can devote all their time to a handful of charges. So, please, don't assume I support smuggling and illegally-obtained animals. There is nothing wrong with keeping animals, if one goes through the proper channels and does things legally. Best to you- Ty
 
Does anyone know when Taronga's tuatara first arrived and if they imported more than they currently have (they currently have 0.3)?
 
Chlidonias said:
that depends on your taxonomy. Traditionally they are considered the same species, but more often now they are split in two (Ninox novaeseelandiae in New Zealand, Lord Howe and Norfolk, and Ninox boobook in Australia). Then there's the Tasmanian boobook which has recently been suggested as belonging to N. novaeseelandiae rather than N. boobook which is a little confusing!
Click to expand...

Well, if the Tasmanian taxa is more closely related to the NZ taxa than the mainland Australia taxa, then that would suggest they are the source of NZ's morepork, but it seems weird that they (or the NZ descendants) would then be the source for Lord Howe's and Norfolk's moreporks as well (the standard source pattern is typically Mainland Aust -> Norfolk -> NZ, not Aust -> NZ -> Norfolk). I don't know though, I'll have to have a read up on Boobook/Morepork phylogeography.

Either way, I maintain that Morepork are among the least unusual NZ bird species :D
 
zooboy28 said:
Well, if the Tasmanian taxa is more closely related to the NZ taxa than the mainland Australia taxa, then that would suggest they are the source of NZ's morepork, but it seems weird that they (or the NZ descendants) would then be the source for Lord Howe's and Norfolk's moreporks as well (the standard source pattern is typically Mainland Aust -> Norfolk -> NZ, not Aust -> NZ -> Norfolk). I don't know though, I'll have to have a read up on Boobook/Morepork phylogeography.

Either way, I maintain that Morepork are among the least unusual NZ bird species :D
Click to expand...
well, it's taxonomy, so it's complicated. For some authorities Australian, Tasmanian and New Zealand birds are all one species (N. novaeseelandiae); for others there is a two-way split, N.novaeseelandiae in NZ, Norfolk and Lord Howe, and N. boobook in Australia and Tasmania; then there's the three-way split where the Tasmanian birds are a separate species entirely, N. leucopsis; then there's the NZ-Tasmania versus Australia mainland split (N. novaeseelandiae in NZ-Tasmania and N. boobook on mainland Australia.

Personally I split the morepork (N. novaeseelandiae) from the boobook (N. boobook) but I'm not yet sure on whether I'll include the Tasmanian boobook in N. boobook or if I'll split it as N. leucopsis (I haven't seen one yet so it is currently a moot point). I certainly don't think it should be considered conspecific with the morepork. I'd probably be leaning towards the three-way split.
 
Chlidonias said:
Red-crowned and yellow-crowned kakariki are very very common in private aviculture overseas, but there are probably no pure birds of either due to extensive hybridisation (so only birds that look more like one or the other)..
Click to expand...

Phenotype wise things are getting better. I recently managed to get my hands on some auriceps that match the wild-birds perfectly. This taken into account I m very sure that a DNA test would show that they have some noveazelandiae blood in them. But kakarikis stay a genus I love to work with, although husbandry wise they aren't the biggest challenge.

And if you start sending species to Europe I wouldn't mind to see some Cyanoramphus unicolor, although at the moment DOC even banned private keepers in NZ to breed them. Unfortunately as like all Cyanoramphus species they seem to breed like mice.
 
DDcorvus said:
Phenotype wise things are getting better. I recently managed to get my hands on some auriceps that match the wild-birds perfectly. This taken into account I m very sure that a DNA test would show that they have some noveazelandiae blood in them. But kakarikis stay a genus I love to work with, although husbandry wise they aren't the biggest challenge.

And if you start sending species to Europe I wouldn't mind to see some Cyanoramphus unicolor, although at the moment DOC even banned private keepers in NZ to breed them. Unfortunately as like all Cyanoramphus species they seem to breed like mice.
Click to expand...
unicolor would be very popular amongst private aviculturists overseas but I doubt zoos would show much interest. They are just a little green parrot after all; easier to get some Indian ringnecks for all the public is going to know.

In New Zealand only a few private persons have ever had permits to keep unicolor; they have never been widely kept as auriceps and novaezelandiae have been. Until fairly recently DoC had even stopped zoos from breeding them (DoC makes some strange decisions sometimes with regards to captive wildlife) but this was changed a while back. All the unicolor here are very inbred in any case because they are descended from only a very few original birds.
 
Chlidonias said:
unicolor would be very popular amongst private aviculturists overseas but I doubt zoos would show much interest. They are just a little green parrot after all; easier to get some Indian ringnecks for all the public is going to know.

In New Zealand only a few private persons have ever had permits to keep unicolor; they have never been widely kept as auriceps and novaezelandiae have been. Until fairly recently DoC had even stopped zoos from breeding them (DoC makes some strange decisions sometimes with regards to captive wildlife) but this was changed a while back. All the unicolor here are very inbred in any case because they are descended from only a very few original birds.
Click to expand...

I m afraid you're right and even if you want a small green parrot that needs to come from NZ it is a lot easier to get yourself a yellow-fronted or red-fronted. Why as a Zoo would you spend a lot of money on another green one.

One question are there any unicolor left in private collections, as I got mixed answers from NZ aviculturists and DoC? And how big are the problems with inbreeding. We're dealing with an island species which has been gone through a bottleneck before and the past showed that this helped to clear a lot of the potential negative heterozygote properties.
 
DDcorvus said:
One question are there any unicolor left in private collections, as I got mixed answers from NZ aviculturists and DoC? And how big are the problems with inbreeding. We're dealing with an island species which has been gone through a bottleneck before and the past showed that this helped to clear a lot of the potential negative heterozygote properties.
Click to expand...
the last information I have is from 1995 when there were ten private holders. I don't know about now.

Regarding the captive population (you might know all this already), it is derived from just eleven founders caught during the 70s and 80s with the aim of establishing a new wild population on offshore (mainland) islands through the release of captive-bred birds. This is a pretty stupid idea really, and it never really went anywhere. The birds bred rapidly, but in 1992 DoC instructed holders (at that time 12 public and 10 private) not to breed any more. This was reviewed in 1995 because of the now-skewed age ratio of the population (they aren't particularly long-lived birds). I haven't had anything to do with unicolor for a long time so I don't really know the current situation with them.
 
Thanks Chlidonias, most of this I knew, but it is good to get confirmation on my info. Ít seems I need to dig a bit further to see if there are any private keepers left in the antipodes' programme. It would have been nice to see this species in more hands as the numbers could increase. Even if the founding population is small.

I wish DOC would get a bit more relaxed on private keeping of native birds, although the private scene did not really help creating trust either :(.
 
DDcorvus said:
Thanks Chlidonias, most of this I knew, but it is good to get confirmation on my info. Ít seems I need to dig a bit further to see if there are any private keepers left in the antipodes' programme. It would have been nice to see this species in more hands as the numbers could increase. Even if the founding population is small.

I wish DOC would get a bit more relaxed on private keeping of native birds, although the private scene did not really help creating trust either :(.
Click to expand...
I'll see if I can find out anything more current about unicolor for you.

Regarding DoC and captive wildlife, half the time it seems as if they are dead-set against anything native being captive at all, whether private or public, and then they'll go do an about-face on the matter. It is a government department after all :D
 
3 pages of species kept outside New Zealand and still one not mentioned !!!!!
The New Zealand Falcon is kept at least in privat collections and I guess also some are kept ( and bred ) in the many small public Bird-of Prey parks in Germany, Austria and France.
 
Vogelcommando -- is the New Zealand Falcon ex-situ population genetically viable long term?
 
To be honest : I don't know. It's possible that the birds now kept in Europe are from different bloodlines but it's also possible that they are all produced by a single pair. Sorry I can't provide more usefull information but maybe I can ask somebody how knows more about this matter. I keep in touch !
 
vogelcommando said:
3 pages of species kept outside New Zealand and still one not mentioned !!!!!
The New Zealand Falcon is kept at least in privat collections and I guess also some are kept ( and bred ) in the many small public Bird-of Prey parks in Germany, Austria and France.
Click to expand...
that's amazing, I had no idea at all that there were NZ falcons overseas!

What I have gleaned from the internet is that six birds was legally exported to the UK in 1983 by Nick Fox for research purposes (http://www.falcons.co.uk/default.asp?id=93&menu=1). Some of the ones he bred went to other private falconers but his group seems to have died out and the remainder are in low (unviable) numbers.

Looking at Zootierliste there are no NZ falcons listed for any European collections currently, and only three historically (all in the UK, of which only Weyhill has had them anywhere near recently).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top