Dr Bruce Robertson in the conservation-genetics laboratory
at the University of Otago zoology department. Photo by
Linda Robertson.
A team of researchers led by Dr Bruce Robertson of the
Otago University zoology department has proved the New Zealand
storm petrel, which was believed to have been extinct since the
1800s, is still flying high in the Hauraki Gulf.
It took five years of research after the first specimen was
captured when it flew into a fishing boat wheelhouse in 2005,
to prove the little bird was a New Zealand storm petrel
(Fregetta Maoriana).
Several more birds were soon caught, but in order to show
they were New Zealand storm petrels, Dr Robertson's team had
to match the birds' DNA to samples taken from a pair of more
than 150-year-old New Zealand storm petrel skins on display
in Paris.
"We found they were one and the same," Dr Robertson said,
"and these birds are a distinct species of storm petrel."
He said it was important to prove they were members of a
distinct species, as there had been some concern they could
have simply been a different kind of petrel with unusual
colouring (known as the "pealea effect").
Conservation work on the New Zealand storm petrel had been
held up for several years because its conservation status was
listed as "data deficient", meaning more information was
required before funds would be released for conservation
work, Dr Robertson said, the difficulty being that gathering
more information required money.
"It's always a catch-22," Dr Robertson said. "We need the
money to find where they breed because it's not going to be
an easy effort. They are very small birds, they are
nocturnal, and they only come to land at night.
To find where they are, unless you fluke it, takes a bit of
effort."
It is not known where the small birds nest, but Dr Robertson
said there were suspicions it might be around the Mokohinau
Islands, to the northeast of Auckland.
Birdlife International was providing $20,000 for research
during the forthcoming season and there was hope the growing
body of research would see the species moved out of the "data
deficient" category and be treated as a protected species.
"Potentially, taking it out of that and saying 'yes it's a
distinct species' should, in my opinion, give it a higher
conservation priority," he said.
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.