Help towards saving wildlife

Press, 26 July 1980, Page 15

Help towards saving wildlife

. A grant of $25,000 from lottery funds has beeh made to the Wildlife Service for a public relations campaign to make the general public, the Government, and the politicians aware of how negligent the Wildlife Service has been forced to be towards most endangered birds and other wildlife. This move owes much to the urging of Dr Christoph Imboden, who has resigned as the Wildlife Service director of research, and has now returned to Europe. Research and management of endangered species generally is expensive. Most bird species concerned live only in remote areas or on off-shore islands which are .costly to reach. A high level of involvement with regular and long field expeditions, is needed in many cases. Management costs, such as building predator proof fences or eradicating predators, can also be very high. In order to do justice to this imminent threat to a priceless natural resource, the Wildlife Service would need at least double the number of staff on endangered species work and three to four times as much money as at present The present economic climate does not encourage hopes that extra money will be forthcoming. But the realities and urgency of the situation demand that the Government and national and (increasingly critical) international public be made aware of ’ the true situation. The alternatives are clear — either continue as at present with severely restricted efforts and risk the almost certain result of losing more. species, or face up tn the' real costs of Conserving the country’s natural heritage. “As a first step, the Wildlife. Service has to change, drastically its' information policy,” Dr Imboden said. “Instead of birds on Stewart Island,

pieces, we must now focus on what the Wildlife Service fails to do.

“A long list of neglected tasks and unattended problems, and their possible consquences, have largely remained concealed from the public. We must show that it is neither the Wildlife Service’s ignorance nor its lack of experience that. has brought about this serious situ-

ation, but rather lack of resources.” Five native birds — the laughing owl, orangefronted parakeet, bush wren. New Zealand thrush, and South Island kokako — are to be at the centre of a public relations campaign. All five are classified as being “probably extinct,” but unconfirmed sightings at irregular intervals are

still being reported. There is a real chance that one or two of the five species still survive in some remote areas.

Dr Imboden has nominated these five Species as a prime example of high priority species which the Wildlife Service is having to neglect. If they are rediscovered now s they might still. be saved; if they are left, any longer

they will certainly become extinct. The basic idea of the campaign is to ask the public to participate in the hunt for these’ elusive species. The primary objective would not be to collect information that

might lead to rediscovery’, although this could well happen, but to draw general attention to the plight of New Zealand’s endangered species and to highlight the fact that the danger of further extinctions is as great as ever.

OLIVER RIDDELL looks into the Wildlife Service assessment of New Zealand’s natural heritage.